More AI, ANN
One of the techniques used in Artificial Intelligence is the Artificial Neural Network. I am currently working on designing classes in VBScript to implement ANNs. One thing I have not found, is a technique that determines, even on an empirical level, what would be an almost optimal number of neurons for the hidden layer. The input layer and output layers are pretty much defined by the number of inputs and outputs. The hidden layer needs to have as few neurons as possible to allow processing in the shortest time possible, but needs to have enough neurons to ensure correct output.
Would anyone have a formula or algorithm that can be used dynamically for determination of this number? I would think that something like the mean of the number of inputs and outputs would work, but then, if they are ratio of inputs and outputs is 1 that would be too much processing, especially for a large number of inputs. On the other hand, if there were just one input and one output, it may be insufficient.
I suppose that it wouldn't be out of the question to start with one neuron, then do a check when we do the backpropagation for sufficient change, and add another neuron, if things weren't converging well enough, but that may necessitate training all over again. I really don't feel that this would be something that higher level brains don't do, because there is so many neurons already. Again, the concern would be the time this takes. So, what's another synapse or thousand? After all, the Scientific American May 2005 issue's article on Neuromorphic Microchips, states that "neurons that fire together wire together," which would pave the way for the addition of neurons. An interesting article by the way. Me loves dat SciAm mag, hehe.
If someone more knowledgeable than I happens to read this, please feel free to comment.
Labels: Scripting
posted by Charles @ 10:47 AM
Comments: 7 <-<<Add One!
7 Comments:
This is so much greek & latin to me. But sounds interesting.Its amazing, the way science has revolutionzed everything.Neurons that fire together wire together you said.But I like what they sire..that is connecting ppl from far off that seemed so impossible not very long ago.
Now, in a layman's term, wud, what you have spoken about , mean that you can move computers through thought process?
Well I am dumb as far as science is concerned, but my son, who is in High school wants to opt for genetic engineering.I heard that is a very wide field to explore.
For the past few years so much stress has been given to management studies taht science seems to have taken a backseat.It seems to be picking up again & I guess its going to come up in a big way...
Artificial Intelligence...is there not a movie there by this name?wud love to see it.
speaking of movies, I saw one yesterday called ' A Beautiful Mind'. It is an amazing movie. Spectacular example in human courage to overcome a disease as serious as schizophernia.A one man battle with his own demons & how he overcame the hurdles that were not only styptic to his growth but so very dangerous & harmful otherwise.It confirmed my Trust, that the Energy of our being is neutral.It is how you choose to use it.For example, if you want to cure a doubtful mind, you just have to stop paying attention to Doubt, & bring in more Energy into Trust.This way, man can overcome any situation, however difficult.Don't you think so?
Hey dizzy,
In answer to your 1st question, no I can't move computers through my thought process. There was a monkey though, that they connected to a robotic arm, and he could move it to feed himself, with his thoughts. Telekinesis wasn't one of my gifts, but I always wished it had been. I move my fingers, that move my thoughts to processes, that move data in computers.
As for your son's future, I would suggest that he go into the newest of fields, that of proteonomics (not certain of that spelling), which I believe will be bigger than genetic engineering. Its the study of the intracellular machinery and how all the proteins, enzymes,transcriptases, et cetera work together to build and maintain the cell. I aggree, that much emphasis has been placed on management. They keep it up they will only have managers to manage, and no one to carry on the real work. In answer to the 2nd question, yes & no, AI was a movie, but not Artificial Intelligence. I haven't seen it, but it looked to have a lot of computer graphics.
A Beautiful Mind was a great movie, about an incredible genius, who happened to be the victim of an organic mental illness. I wasn't familiar with the whole story of the man until I saw it. I believe the only real healing of our minds has to take place within our minds. Drugs may help for the short term, but first we must desire to get better, then do those things that move us in the direction of health. Without the desire, we can't pursue it to fruition. Without the movement, we go nowhere, and thus things stay. I for one wouldn't want to go back to the way things were, or even stay as I am. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to be like so many others, either.
Dear Charles
Thank you for your suggestion.I shall advise my son to look up google search for that particular branch to see if it intrests him.Yes as far as news items go, I see that stem cell therapy is comming up in a big way & I do see it too as a revolutionary breakthrough in curing certain diseases like Alzhimer's & Parkinson's & cancer & diabetese.
Ours is basically an agricultural Nation. So emphasis is more on agricultural scientific research.But I think that the change is coming quicker than we can imagine & the medical research is gaining impetus too.
Yes , you are right about moving on.Life is like a river, like moving water; as long as it keeps flowing the water will remain fresh.The moment it stands still & stagnate, the rot sets in.
Also, like a river, we must make our own path as we flow.
& nobody shud want to go back to things 'as they were', no matter how good they might have been.One can relish the golden moments of life by remembering them, not by trying to re-live them, because in Life, there can be no Categorical Imperatives. Life is not a scientific experiment that wud bring in same results[ material or emotional or spiritual] each time we repeat a certain pattern.Life has no obligation to conform to the past.
Also, no one shud ever attempt to be like ANY other, no matter how much of a role model.One has to be just oneself.You may emulate qualities of certain ppl that have taken them higher in life, But do not try to be them.Always be original, no matter how little a contribution to life that might be, it will still be huge.But if you try to be like someone else, you will end up being just a carbon copy, & then you will be in trouble too, because your life is not their's & vice versa.
Every individual, no matter how ordinary, is extraordinary in his/her ordinariness.If the creator considered us special enough to create us, we are all very special.But that is our Being.Being is beautiful as it is. Yet the beauty can be enhanced further by us, by making the 'being' as 'becoming'.It is for us, upto us, to give a 'meaning' to our life, which comes with our strife, & TOGETHER with our mistakes & achivements.Life becomes a whole lot different if you see your mistakes not as your failures, but as ' a discovery of Things that won't work in certain situations'.
Do you mean,that we will exist in virtual reality after that.What do you say ' Unreal'.:-)
Charles...we are dabbling in darkness as far as science go, but I hope you dont mind a bit of humour.
Do visit my blog for some funny tales when you have time.
Cheers
Hey Dizzy,
I had already visited your site, previously. I found it a bit on the "different side". You should write children's books, without the sexual content of course, but you have the "moral of the story stuff" down. We all need to be careful.
Hey Unreal,
When I was much younger, I used to fantasize about making computers more powerful by making them 3 dimensional. It would seem that we are both wrong. It has been well over a decade ago, that I read of the "Connection Machine" in Scientific American. It went beyond 3 dimensional, it was using "Hypercubes", if I remember correctly. It was definitely a super-computer, at that point in time. Have you been reading anything about the XBox 360? Over a teraflop processing power, in what will likely be a $300 machine! That's sick. I love it.
Hey Charles...
I agree..but Let me tell you, I am no writer by any standards or means.I am a business woman.I built that site in order to ' give it back' to a group of bloggers.A very old friend[Shakeel] invited me to the blog world & to my surprise I found I was being victimized in a most horrible manner in his writings just because, two deacades ago I had rejected his proposal of marriage.He was writing Dizzy chronicles[ Dizzy was the name of a cat I owned a long time ago] & using foul & degarading terms in my context calling me 'whore' & a 'bitch' ever now & then.The posts were seemingly innocous, but I knew better...My protestations on his comment box did not go well with his admirers[ a group of Malaysian bloggers]specially Dina [ a co- editor of some Malaysian online publication]Who first pretended to symapathise with me & then suddenly for some reason [ God knows what] turned hostile.
So you know where "DINEEL'of the second bit comes from & why it is 'us' & 'we'.
I know, this might sound like revenge spree to you, but I assur you, it was just a holding of mirror upto their faces, from what I gathered about them from their writings on their blogs.
Eventually they both withdrew from blogging after that horrible tale I wrote.
I had warned this person,told him that to every cause there is an effect. You might want to slap a person & do it. But then he might slap you back & then you might not like that.So no intelligent person shud act without thinking about the effect in advance...
Wonder why I am telling you this...
Sorry..I shud not have asked you to visit that blog at all...
Post a Comment
<< Home