Hi Subutai,

Not sure if you made it to the bottom of my last (big long) post.
 Eventually I found that CLA does work properly in this case.  For some
reason, the anomaly score was returned as "nan" and that threw off the
plotting.  I sent my files to Matt for forensics as he requested.
Explicitly searching and replacing nan's with 1.0's made my plots look much
better.

Cheers,

Ritchie


> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:10:33 -0700
> From: Subutai Ahmad <[email protected]>
> To: "NuPIC general mailing list." <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [nupic-discuss] Noisy step example
> Message-ID:
>         <
> ca+zatih1krt3khyyhk5pgkp_rnpnxtg6s+g9qif7q98-0h3...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> My guess would be the same as Marek's. Or perhaps some other parameter
> differences. I'm not sure why the anomaly score doesn't spike at the jump
> in your test. We see this type of transition all the time in Grok and it
> seems to work well. In Grok we do have learning on always - I don't know if
> that could be a difference.
> --Subutai


Ritchie Lee
Research Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University-Silicon Valley
NASA Ames Research Center
Bldg 19, Rm 1024
Moffett Field, CA 94035
(650) 335-2847
_______________________________________________
nupic mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org

Reply via email to