You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

IlyaShpitser comments on [Link] AlphaGo: Mastering the ancient game of Go with Machine Learning - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: ESRogs 27 January 2016 09:04PM

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

Comments (122)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: bogus 29 January 2016 06:01:49PM *  0 points [-]

Yes, but only because "ANN" is enormously broad (tensor/linear algebra program space), and basically includes all possible routes to AGI (all possible approximations of bayesian inference).

"Enormously broad" is just another way of saying "not very useful". We don't even know in which sense (if any) the "deep networks" that are used in practice may be said to approximate Bayesian inference; the best we can do, AIUI, is make up a hand-wavy story about how they must be some "hierarchical" variation of single-layer networks, i.e. generalized linear models.

Comment author: jacob_cannell 29 January 2016 09:58:41PM 1 point [-]

Specifically I meant approx bayesian inference over the tensor program space to learn the ANN, not that the ANN itself needs to implement bayesian inference (although they will naturally tend to learn that, as we see in all the evidence for various bayesian ops in the brain) .