In particular, even if we use some form of approximate inference, there’s so many options out there (and probably none of them are good enough to be what humans actually use) that pseudolikelihood is not itself that likely.
Other versions of approximate inference: Markov-Chain Monte Carlo, Variational Inference, Loopy Belief Propogation.
Although merely citing research to back up your claims doesn’t, in my opinion, make your arguments significantly stronger unless the research itself has been established fairly rigorously; for instance, the affect heuristic, while a popular theme on LessWrong, lacks experimental evidence.
In particular, even if we use some form of approximate inference, there’s so many options out there (and probably none of them are good enough to be what humans actually use) that pseudolikelihood is not itself that likely.
Other versions of approximate inference: Markov-Chain Monte Carlo, Variational Inference, Loopy Belief Propogation.
Although merely citing research to back up your claims doesn’t, in my opinion, make your arguments significantly stronger unless the research itself has been established fairly rigorously; for instance, the affect heuristic, while a popular theme on LessWrong, lacks experimental evidence.