thomas_rm

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by thomas_rm 6y ago

   I think Norvig is a smart person, I enjoy his books, papers and jupyter notebooks, but I always thought he was pretty clueless regarding AI, as history indeed demonstrated. That's not an ad hominem. What is shameful was the extreme shu
2. 2.▲
   by thomas_rm 6y ago

   Interest in neural networks was renewed with Werbos's (1975) backpropagation algorithm. There was continued progress in ANNs all this time. I think the aversion to ANNs during the 90s was more philosophical and aesthetic - ANNs math is
3. 3.▲
   by thomas_rm 6y ago

   We seem to be re-enacting the Symbolic vs Connectionist AI debate of the 80s, poorly. All I'm saying is, Norvig should have been more humble and included a chapter or two about ANNs, with all the research accumulated thus far, instead
4. 4.▲
   by thomas_rm 6y ago

   As opposed to the AI techniques taught in the AIMA book (KR and logic reasoning), which had plateau'ed in the 70s...? Norvig had to be pretty clueless to decide ANNs are such a dead-end, that they don't deserve even a chapter in h
5. 5.▲
   by thomas_rm 6y ago

   To remind people: Yann LeCun worked on artificial neural networks (ANN) during the period where they were actively shunned by most of the scientific community. You could barely publish a paper on ANN. Just to demonstrate, one the most commo