EE
MoritzG
Karma: 17
[Question] Multiple conditions must be met to gain causal effect
[Question] Matrix Multiplication
Oh, sorry.
I think that other people think: BPD and ASD are independent, orthogonal mental afflictions. The autism spectrum reaches from zero to +100%.
But I think they share a remarkable resemblance in that they are the opposites in deviation from the norm. The autism emotionally unstable spectrum reaches from “emotionally unstable” to “emotionally unresponsive”. Or −100% to +100%
Better? (This editor is impossible for me.)
As we know and you mentioned, humans do learn from small data. We start with priors that are hopefully not too strong and go through the known processes of scientific discovery. NN do not have that meta process or any introspection (yet).
“You cannot solve this problem by minimizing your error over historical data. Insofar as big data minimizes an algorithm’s error over historical results … Big data compensates for weak priors by minimizing an algorithm’s error over historical results. Insofar as this is true, big data cannot reason about small data.”
NN also do not reduce/idealize/simplify, explicitly generalize and then run the results as hypothesis forks. Or use priors to run checks (BS rejection / specificity). We do.
Maybe there will be a evolutionary process where huge NNs are reduced to do inference at “the edge” that turns into human like learning after feedback from “the edge” is used to select and refine the best nets.
In Germany the data is ATM consistent with:
+22% infected per day which is exactly +3 people infected after one week after the infection by every infected. (This is assuming that there no imported cases, 7th root of ((1+3)/1))
I made up this story:
In a company there have been head injuries, so they brought in a medical student to investigate/research.
The researcher gathered all employees blood pressure, gender, age, and eye sight data.
The result was that mostly men were affected, with all other factors being what you would expect given the employees.
The company was forced by the insurance company to make helmets mandatory for all men due to their gender being a risk factor.
Because the engineers were all men they were over proportionally affected and did not like to wear the helmets, so they got together and demanded further research into what caused the injuries and how to remove the cause.
This time the secretary was tasked with the follow up because she knew Excel. She took her mail scale and measuring tape and went around asking everyone if they drank coffee or tea, measured the weight of the content of people’s pockets and how high they were with and without shoes. To be thorough she did this for every week day separately.
After importing the previous data, she found many correlations between attributes and other attributes variances but what stood out were the correlations between injuries to Friday, pocket weight, gender, height with shoes in ascending order. A histogram of injuries per “height without shoes”-class showed a sharp increase at 6 feet. Being taller than 6′ was clearly the cause.
After having presented her findings, one woman stood up and remarked: “But I am not 6′, and it happened to me!” Counting the women taller than 6′ the secretary found none.
---
I could go on but I think you get it and we can save us the time. After more searching they found that their 6 foot door frames were the best thing to change and that some women had been wearing higher shoes on Fridays.
My point is that gender was not the cause and especially “too low doors” AND (“over 6′ tall” OR (“tall for a woman” AND “high shoes”)) was the problem. Neither being a tall woman nor high shoes alone would have been causal in this scenario.
I would have loved to include wheel chairs in this but found it too complicated.
I found these two articles on AI’s mental health:
“Can Artificial Intelligences Suffer from Mental Illness? A Philosophical Matter to Consider”
Hutan Ashrafian
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364237/
“Does my algorithm have a mental-health problem?”
Thomas T Hills is professor of psychology at the University of Warwick in Coventry, UK.
https://aeon.co/ideas/made-in-our-own-image-why-algorithms-have-mental-health-problems
[Question] Causal without correlation, how?
[Question] What types of compute/processing could we distinguish?
This sometimes helps to expose assumptions
Please elaborate on why you think the bicycle “merely offer convenience or entertainment”. I understand that people did not understand it’s potential and thought of it as a toy for crazy people, but wasn’t the same true for the gasoline-automobile? To me the bicycle is of great importance, not just/only for leisure, sport. I understand that the bicycle’s value depends on the distance, flatness, wind, road quality traveled, but compared to a horse (that most did not have) it is so much better.
“autistic people … generally have very low intelligence. One study … autistic people had an IQ …”
Unless you positively define intelligence as measured by some IQ-Test, I oppose that statement.
The entire discussion around intelligence would profit, if people would stop casually equating the two.
One is a test that have seen different ones of and some where out right bad others flawed, the other is a concept that can be described, but is much more often used than understood by the public.
Limits of and to (artificial) Intelligence
Examples: There is no evidence for the existence of human races. There is no evidence for biological differences between the sexes.
I will trust a person that states: “I think the sky is brown.” more than a person that counters with: “The sky is certainly not brown, it is gray, because we have not seen it.”
Other non-primate animal doing similar: Alex the gray parrot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_(parrot) He also made his own terms as “cork nut” for almond.
I don’t get the joke. Who is “Rick Astley”?
Found this on the topic https://www.rudikershaw.com/articles/ai-doom-isnt-coming and liked it.
“freedom to self-alter its own error function”
How? By changing the function alone or by changing the input to that function?
“Styling” I will (and can) make the edits.
“parody” I call it a polemic analogy.
“seems, if not in conflict with” I think you noticed that there is no contradiction, but I agree that I need to clarify. Faced with a massive lack of information and the task to predict the future it is clear that it would be pure luck to make the best decision. Operating with that mindset might even be hindering.
″ I must seek C*(A+B) at a lower cost.” I was trying to get into what to choose / look for in a finite set with competition. A B C … are terms of criteria that I estimate to be fulfilled to some degree. For simplicity they shall be binary logic terms. Every option that I have has more properties than I even know about and those I do know and find relevant, I either seek or avoid. Any term might contain many such properties. Knowing what others are looking and paying for and that the world is very complicated, I find it more sensible to intentionally not use the same function to assess options. Instead I must design my net to “fish” in other areas of the choice property space. This applies to HR or any other investment.
“only a minority of people use a bicycle for anything other than recreation”
I guess my upbringing and surrounding is special (densely populated area in north Europe), but I know plenty of people who move in no other way (shopping, vacation, commute, everything). Before the gasoline motor scooter became wide spread, and poisoned the air in Asia, people used bikes all the time.