> > Nevertheless, in this case, it looks like the implementation should > "protect" that. I.e. don't perform compute() in temporalMemory if > activeColumns in "t" are equal to "t-1".
Repetitions are significant in the sequence. Remember, we're not "calculating", we're simply activating columns and cells in a pattern; reinforcing affinities of connections - not doing operations which yield a "final result". We're modeling neural circuitry not building an equivalent formula calculator? It takes some getting used to :-) Actually, the implementation is *totally* event-driven. If there are no inputs, nothing happens! :-) David On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Valentin Puente <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2015-05-06 17:27 GMT+02:00 cogmission (David Ray) < > [email protected]>: > >> Valentin, >> >> >>> Perhaps, I have some crazy idea about what is going on. I think that >>> the notion of "t" and "t-1", implicitly asumes a synchronous circuit. >>> Nevertheless, biology don't have any clock around... definitely is >>> asynchronous. Under such assumption the previous sequence is not possible, >>> since all the repeated values are the same. Therefore, I think that the "t" >>> and "t-1" should be redefined as the time where the "input changed". If we >>> feed the memory with the same input sequence in t and t-1 something is >>> going to be bad at the end. >> >> >> HTM Theory does not have any real "time" so to speak. We're talking about >> sequences, and yes in the biology (I just recently overheard this), there >> are "serial" cell/column events. Now, "t-1" refers to the state the >> cell/column was left in during the previous activation - cells "depolarize" >> making them quicker to fire (and subsequently beat out the race against >> inhibitory cell activations); the resulting "depolarization" is what is >> modeled as the state in t-1 (AFAIK). >> >>> >> > Thanks David. I understand now (being used to circuits, this is a bit hard > for me :-) > > Nevertheless, in this case, it looks like the implementation should > "protect" that. I.e. don't perform compute() in temporalMemory if > activeColumns in "t" are equal to "t-1". > > -- > vpuente > > PS: Perhaps the implementation is too "time-driven". I think that a > "event-driven" approach could be more close to the reality (besides have > better performance... especially given the sparsity of the problem). > -- *With kind regards,* David Ray Java Solutions Architect *cortical.io <http://cortical.io/>* Sponsor of: HTM.java <https://github.com/numenta/htm.java> [email protected] http://cortical.io
