Matt, > But it's probably out of date and very sparse on details.
Thanks for this, Matt. I sent this message, just because the wiki is outdated and a ML discussion could be interesting to people expose the _why_ their implementation has something extra over Nupic and others. Aseem, > By implementation did u mean actual programming algorithm? Yes, I did. It's because algorithms is naturally the final product of a cognitive model. Actually, you don't need enter into details in your answer, you could simply mention why your implementation is interesting and links to documentation (as you did). For example, Fergal and Eric have their own implementations of HTM where they add other cognitive features already present on deep learning networks and others. Usually they post their major breakthroughs here or at gitter. Keith and Chandan, Yes, a benchmarking would be interesting! We could have our own competition examples (or re-use other cognitive chalenge) to test what HTM implementation is better to perform such example. Once an implementation excel over others we could check its design was the decisive factor and whether it's enough closer to biology to discuss its relevance to Nupic. :-D On 6 January 2015 at 14:45, Matthew Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > We have a list of HTM implementations here: > https://github.com/numenta/nupic/wiki/Other-HTM-CLA-projects > > But it's probably out of date and very sparse on details. If anyone > wants to provide more details about individual projects (especially > developments status, features), feel free to edit the wiki. > --------- > Matt Taylor > OS Community Flag-Bearer > Numenta > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:00 AM, David Ragazzi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > It is known that many here have implemented their own versions of HTM. > Some > > implementations have features that even Nupic implementation still > doesn't > > have. So I think is a healthy discussion you share the description of > > implementations, and who knows we take the best from each one and > replicate > > these features on Nupic (if biologically plausible, of course). This > would > > accelerate the process of make Nupic closer to brain. > > > > Again, it would be interesting heard implementations that really have > > something else than Nupic: I mean cognitive features like better > > inference/learning, motor integration, or even performance improvements > like > > parallelism and others, and that are biologically designed (based on > cells > > archicteture, not on mathematical rules). > > > > Looking forward for heard you, > > > > Cheers, > > -- > > 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."
