RaelwayScot comments on Stupid Questions November 2015 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Tem42 19 November 2015 10:36PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (64)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: RaelwayScot 21 November 2015 09:08:27AM 0 points [-]

Do Bayesianists strongly believe that the Bayes' theorem accurately describes how the brain changes its latent variables in face of new data? It seems very unlikely to me that the brain keeps track of probability distributions and that they sum up to one. How do Bayesianists believe this works at the neuronal level?

Comment author: Creutzer 21 November 2015 11:31:52AM *  4 points [-]

The term you will want to use in your Google search is "Bayesian cognitive science". It's a huge field. But the short answer is, yes, the people in that field do assume that the brain does something that can be modelled as keeping and updating a probability distribution according to Bayes' rule. Much of it is computational-level modelling, i.e. rather removed from questions of implementation in the brain. A quick Google search did, however, find some papers on how to implement Bayesian inference in neural networks - though not necessarily linked to the brain. I'm sure some people do the latter sort of thing as well, though.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 21 November 2015 01:54:45PM 2 points [-]

Search also for "Bayesian brain".

Comment author: SilentCal 23 November 2015 11:18:38PM 1 point [-]

That said, being a statistical or philosophical Bayesian does not require one to believe this cognitive science hypothesis. If Bayesian cognitive science were soundly disproven tomorrow, http://www.yudkowsky.net/rational/bayes/ would still stand in its entirety.