Sounds good. While I have the TemporalMemory implemented I still am going
to revisit it to flush out some concepts I started working on for the
SpatialPooler that I want to re-implement in the TM. So, I'm not ready
quite yet to collaborate but I like the idea.

Let's take this to a new discussion though ok?

Cheers,
David (Ray)


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:03 AM, David Ragazzi <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Mr. Ray, your Java version could serve as good base and starting point for
> implement a OO version in Python. If you wish, we could work together on
> that.
>
>
> On 27 August 2014 12:53, cogmission1 . <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I like the Labs = archived experiments, Incubator = current approved
>> experiments idea... That sounds interesting?
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 10:49 AM, David Ragazzi <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I support this idea but with one condition:
>>> -> If we move stable pieces of research to a specific folder. I mean
>>> that SP and TP that are working fine could be in a separated folder as
>>> occurs in Nupic.Core. In this case, we would put Python CLA that is ok into
>>> nupic/engine folder. This is how the code is organized in Nupic.Core. Or
>>> better, create an python OO version of CLA into nupic/engine, so peeople
>>> wouldn't concern about understand nupic/research in case of they which have
>>> fun with CLA instantaneously.
>>>
>>> So if new changes in nupic/research bring proved improvements to NuPIC,
>>> we update the algorithms in nupic/engine. This way we keep the things well
>>> organized.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 August 2014 09:22, Seyyed Mohammad mohammadzadeh <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Seems taht link is broken.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-08-26 23:09 GMT+04:30 Matthew Taylor <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>> Hello NuPIC,
>>>>>
>>>>> We have been wondering at Numenta whether it is possible to be even
>>>>> more open about our algorithm research. Here is a proposal, and I'd
>>>>> like to know what you think.
>>>>>
>>>>> We could, in an effort to be more transparent with ongoing prototypes
>>>>> and experiments with algorithm implementations, publish this work in a
>>>>> public repository at https://github.com/numenta/nupic.research.  This
>>>>> would be temporary experimental code, which poses some challenges.
>>>>> This would mean:
>>>>>
>>>>> - it can change without warning or explanation
>>>>> - it will change quickly as experiments are discarded and recreated
>>>>> - it might not change at all for a while
>>>>> - it could just be plain wrong or buggy for periods of time
>>>>> - code will not be production-quality
>>>>> - comments and questions about this code may be ignored
>>>>> - Numenta is under no obligation to properly document or explain this
>>>>> codebase or follow any understandable process
>>>>> - repository will be read-only
>>>>>
>>>>> We want to be as transparent as possible, but we also want to move
>>>>> fast with these experiments so the finalized algorithms can be
>>>>> included into NuPIC as soon as they are ready. Would a public
>>>>> repository like this benefit the NuPIC community? Or create confusion
>>>>> about what's coming next?
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------
>>>>> Matt Taylor
>>>>> OS Community Flag-Bearer
>>>>> Numenta
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: A copy of this message was send to nupic-discuss and nupic-theory.
>>>>> You may safely respond to either message to send back to the
>>>>> respective list. I'll be monitoring both threads, so either one is
>>>>> fine.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards.
>>>> S.M. Mohammadzadeh
>>>> *Web: www.mohammadzadeh.info <http://www.mohammadzadeh.info>*
>>>> *Blog: blog.mohammadzadeh.info <http://blog.mohammadzadeh.info/>*
>>>>
>>>> * softnhard ==> software and hardware expert
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> David Ragazzi
>>> MSc in Sofware Engineer (University of Liverpool)
>>> OS Community Commiter at Numenta.org
>>> --
>>> "I think James Connolly, the Irish revolutionary, is right when he says that
>>> the only prophets are those who make their future. So we're not
>>> anticipating, we're working for it."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> David Ragazzi
> MSc in Sofware Engineer (University of Liverpool)
> OS Community Commiter at Numenta.org
> --
> "I think James Connolly, the Irish revolutionary, is right when he says that
> the only prophets are those who make their future. So we're not
> anticipating, we're working for it."
>
>
>
>


Reply via email to