On 11/06/06, Philip Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
An article with an opposing point of view than the one I mentioned yesterday...
http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/alex/pub/articles/KnillPougetTINS04.pdf
Why do you find whether there are bayesian estimators in the brain an
interesting question?
I shall explain why I ask this question (from the point of view of
building a weakly self-improving optimisation system).
The approach I take is the baby-based, that is starting from a simple
system that can extract information from the environment and become a
more complex system. From this I have to question which parts of an
adult system are in-built and important for the development of the
system and which are the products of the developmental process.
For example this
http://neuro.caltech.edu/publications/nbb408.pdf
review publication on neural plasticity suggests that some of the
neural locations normally used for processing visual information can
be used for information in processing braille if the vision is lost
early on.
This suggests that not all the sections of brain that are responsible
for the bayesian optimal classification (if it exists) of certain
signals aren't genetically programmed for those specific signals. So
the more interesting question becomes how are they hooked up to those
signals and the correct or nearly correct bias acquired or assigned
for learning about them, whether bayesian optimal or not.
Such questions also arise in how we manage to usefully integrate
visual or orientation data that we acquire through our tongue(!) into
our models of the world.
http://www.wicab.com/
Will Pearson
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
