Matt, Yep, that's exactly what Google did, at least in one case. I guarantee it, I read the patent 8,254,699:
An object recognition system performs a number of rounds of dimensionality reduction and consistency learning on visual content items such as videos and still images, resulting in a set of feature vectors that accurately predict the presence of a visual object represented by a given object name within an visual content item. The feature vectors are stored in association with the object name which they represent and with an indication of the number of rounds of dimensionality reduction and consistency learning that produced them. The feature vectors and the indication can be used for various purposes, such as quickly determining a visual content item containing a visual representation of a given object name. Sergio -----Original Message----- From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:44 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] Discovering physical dimensions On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]> wrote: > What we have now - the pure fantasy that machines can leap to > human-level intelligence (incl. maths and aesthetic appreciation) - in > a couple of bounds - that there is no natural order of evolution of > capabilities - is, to use Sergio's word, absolutely "preposterous". > A Don Quixote joke of pure dreamers. Some people believe that. The way Google will probably solve the "funny video" problem is to take millions of videos that have already been rated by humans, and divide them into a training set and a test set. Then they will experiment with various machine learning algorithms on the training set (running on a million cores) and measure their accuracy on the test set. They won't know in advance which algorithms will work, if any, because the algorithm for humor is poorly understood. They will probably have some guesses, however. It requires understanding of high level features (e.g. cat faces. That part is done). There also has to be an element of surprise, which is why a joke isn't funny the second time you hear it. The result could very well be beyond human comprehension. It works, but we don't understand why it works. -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; d2 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
