Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai    |    Awaiting the gospel from Sarah Connor    |    1,954 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 25 of 1,954    |
|    Anthony Bucci to All    |
|    Re: Why are Neural Nets not AI?    |
|    30 Jul 03 22:07:23    |
      From: abucci@cs.brandeis.edu              You should ask your lecturer what he means. Frankly, it's nigh absurd to       say neural networks are not part of AI.              > This is largely due, IMO, to the work of Minsky & Papert (in their book       > Perceptrons). Since that time, their have been numerous developments in       > the field - although even then they were only trivial if you limited       > yourself to analyzing networks that were easily analyzed (i.e, the       > trivial ones).              What's most ironic and tragic about Perceptrons is that, nowadays, people       do a lot of interesting stuff with perceptrons. There is a lot of image       analysis, for instance, begins with a wavelet transform of the image,       followed by some kind of component analysis (PCA e.g.), followed by       running the resulting coefficients through a perceptron. Or, SVMs can be       thought of as fancy perceptrons -- just add a kernel to a perceptron and       POOF! you have an SVM.              > Ironically, when all is said and done, NNs may end up being the       > only enduring part of AI (although I'm sure to get some howls here),              Oh come on! This is beyond flippant, especially given the reality that       neural nets as a field has virtually imploded.              About chess. People fight about this as a test problem. For all       practical purposes, it's not very compelling anymore. But that's a matter       of popular press -- it's not sexy. However, the AI problem of learning to       play chess with minimal human hand holding is far from being solved.       Deep Blue does not suffice as a solution by any stretch of the       imagination. I should point out, the AI problem of learning to play       TICTACTOE from minimal human input has barely, and in my opinion       unconvincingly, been solved. We have a very long way to go indeed. As a       field, we can hardly agree on how to frame the problems, let alone say       what it means to solve them.              Anthony              [ comp.ai is moderated. To submit, just post and be patient, or if ]       [ that fails mail your article to |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca