On reflection, I think that the sort of compact representations I'm talking 
about aren't really orthogonal in the algebraic sense so much as sufficiently 
distinct (and I can elaborate on that if it's still unclear). I suspect that 
any strictly orthogonal representation is isomorphic to a sparse representation 
and so there's no space advantage to strictly orthogonal vs. sparse. I've heard 
the word "orthogonalize" applied to the process of building 
sufficiently-distinct representations, and so that's the word I pulled out. 
Sorry for any confusion I may have caused by being imprecise.

  - Kevin

On Oct 16, 2013, at 9:04 AM, Archie, Kevin wrote:

> I've been sitting on this question for a while, and it came to mind again a 
> couple of days ago when I heard Jack Gallant talk about some work by his 
> student Alex Huth. He was showing multiple simultaneous recordings from 
> prefrontal cortex (I think) and each neuron was carrying several signals, 
> that (paraphrasing roughly) couldn't be extracted by looking at individual 
> neurons but could be teased out by extracting components from the network 
> activity. (John Maunsell and Bill Newsome also gave talks that similarly 
> showed single neurons firing in response to lots of things, and pulling out 
> the meaning required the context of the network.) The sense I was getting: 
> this is not sparse coding.
> 
> In traditional neural network models (Hopfield-ish associative memories, 
> perceptron networks and the like), generally what you need is not really 
> sparseness but orthogonality. Sparseness is one way to get that, but it's a 
> space-time tradeoff: you can often build a sparse representation quickly if 
> you have plenty of space. There are other ways to get orthogonality, and a 
> dense representation would be making a different tradeoff -- and big brains 
> being metabolically expensive, space is a nontrivial constraint. A 
> speculation I heard some years ago (and I wish I remember from whom; Google 
> yields some echoes but no clear origin) is that the hippocampus and 
> entorhinal cx are busy during sleep building more compact orthogonal 
> representations of the day's input for use by higher association areas.
> 
> Pretty clearly the sensory periphery uses sparse representations, and 
> similarly for areas with really-motor motor outputs. (Extreme example: V1 
> certainly uses sparse representation. V1 is really freakin' big.) Probably 
> some sparse representations persist in, say, anterior temporal, parietal, and 
> frontal cx, but I would suspect that compact orthogonal representations would 
> be important in higher (and smaller) areas. Of course, my suspicions are not 
> evidence, I'm ten years mostly away from the neurophysiology literature, and 
> data beats my speculations. Is there direct evidence that higher cortical 
> areas traffic exclusively or primarily in sparse representations?
> 
> That's the brain theory side. On the more immediately practical side: has 
> anyone tried using compact orthogonal representations with NuPIC? Any success 
> (or failure) stories? I don't even have a guess to what extent SDR is 
> necessary versus just customary.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>  - Kevin
> 
> p.s. Apologies for the theoretical bent of this question. Too many years 
> hanging out in universities have left me tending to think too much rather 
> than just getting started.
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> The material in this message is private and may contain Protected Healthcare 
> Information (PHI). If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any 
> unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance 
> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via 
> telephone or return mail.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nupic mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org


_______________________________________________
nupic mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org

Reply via email to