3 ms·
I think the biggest advantage NNs have over CA is the fact that most CA only provide localized computation. It can take a large number of fixed iterations befor
by bob1029 1y ago
I think the biggest advantage NNs have over CA is the fact that most CA only provide localized computation. It can take a large number of fixed iterations before information propagates to the appropriate location in the 1d/2d/3d/etc. space. Contrast this with arbitrary NN topology where instant global connectivity is possible between any elements.
- Tzt 1y agoCNNs are CA if you don't insert fully connected layers, actually.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- friedchips 1y agoYep, see my comment above and especially http://arxiv.org/abs/1809.02942 http://arxiv.org/abs/1809.02942
- evilmathkid 1y agoYou also need to make the CNN recurrent, allow it to unfold over many steps, ensure input and output grid are same size and avoid non-local stuff like global pooling, certain norms, etc. Either way, parent comment is correct. An arbit NN is better than a CA at learning non-local rules unless the global rule can be easily described as a composition of local rules. (They still can learn any global rule though, its just harder and you run into vanishing gradient problems for very distant rules) They are pretty cool with emergent behaviors and sometimes they generalise very well