Skip to main content

0.0 Introduction to advanced concepts in AI and Machine Learning

By

Introduction to advanced concepts in AI and Machine Learning

I created a set of short videos and blog posts to introduce some advanced ideas in AI and Machine Learning.  It is easier for me to think about them as I met them, chronologically in my life, but I may revisit the ideas later from a different perspective.

I also noticed that one of things I am doing is utilising slightly off-centre tools to describe an idea.  So for example, I employ Kohonen Feature Maps to describe embeddings.  I think I gain a couple of things this way, first it is a different perspective than most people are used to.  In addition, well you will see :-)

I recommend first opening the blog entry (as per the links below), then concurrently watching the linked video.

Hope you enjoy these as much as I did putting them together,

David

Here are links:

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2020/12/memorization-learning-and-classification.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2020/12/12-data-information-and-meaning.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2020/12/13-kmeans-as-means-to-describe-failed.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2020/12/14-kohenen-feature-maps-new-embedded.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2020/12/15-agglomerative-online-clustering.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2021/01/155-multi-scale-defines-learning.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2021/01/16-phase-transitions-measure-of-learning.html

https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2021/01/165-phase-transitions-measure-of.html



=-=-

Here is a fun quote:

https://medium.com/@jcbaillie/beyond-the-symbolic-vs-non-symbolic-ai-debate-96dffce7270c


...

I cannot resist to make a small digression here, about a parallel that can be made with recent trends in physics. Until now, all successful physics has been formulated in the framework of differential equations, acting on continuous and differentiable variables. It is what Wigner called the “unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences”. Recently, more and more researchers are exploring the possibility that Nature is best described at small scale by discrete structures, with evolution formulated as discrete transformation on these structures (see for example the work on Causal Sets, Loop Quantum Gravity, or even the Wolfram Physics project). It is as if, at some point, the unreasonable effectiveness is ending and reality cannot be approximated by models that offer gradients anymore: we have to get down to the raw “machine code” that is inherently discrete, step-wise, compositional and irreducible. One might wonder if these physicists are right (it’s difficult to come up with experiment proposals at that scale, so we might never know), and if some similar dichotomy is not also at play in AI, as discussed above.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

V) How do we know we made a reasonable judgement?

By
V) How do we know we made a reasonable judgement? I was by my brother in NY, on my way to the airport, and I spotted a book by Umberto Eco on information and open systems.  I borrowed the book (and still have it -- sorry Jacob),  just on the whim that I would enjoy more Eco in my life.  I discovered much more, the book is Eco's earlier writing, semiotics mixed with art and science, and has had a profound affect on me.  Eco makes the argument that Shannon's description of information, a measure of the communicability of a message, provides for a measure of art. If it helps think about 'On Interpretation' by Susan Sontag, experience art without interpreting it.  There is no message not even one that we the viewer creates.   There is no meaning to be had, just an experience.  The flip side of this argument is that when there is interpretation there is meaning.  This view, proposed by Semiotics, states that when two closed systems meet and are ...
Post a Comment
Read more

III) Metrics

By
III) Metrics One of these things is not like the other -- but two of these things are distant from a third. I grew up with Brisk Torah, more specifically my father was a Talmid of Rabbi Joseph Soloveichik and dialectic thinking was part and parcel of our discussions.  Two things, two dinim, the rhythm in the flow between two things.  Dialectics not dichotomies.  The idea espoused by the Rambam in his description of Love and Awe, mutually exclusive, we travel between them. Why create duality?  Dialectics or dichotomies provide a powerful tool, but what is it that tool? What is the challenge? I think the Rabbinic language might be נתת דברך לשיעורים, 'your words are given to degrees', the idea being that without clear definitions we are left with vague language, something is more than something else, ok, but how much more? This I think is the reasoning for the first of the twenty one questions I was taught by my father's mother, 'is it bigger than a breadbox?',...
Post a Comment
Read more