No I was just talking about the idea of a special forum session, to beat
out some precise computational experiments from the theory. But I now think
we shouldn't do that. Just leave it ad-hoc.

It's often the incidental conversations that are most valuable, so I was
suggesting we don't fill up all the time with formal talks. I realise this
leaves out remote people but there it is. Maybe we could hire some
telepresence robots.


On 28 October 2015 at 20:20, Richard Crowder <[email protected]> wrote:

> I gained the impression that it was split into two schedules for the
> community side. Having longer presentations with questions and answers
> after or throughout. Then shorter time-limited 'lightning' talks with
> time limited Q&A after (potentially before the longer talks). To help
> presenters enter videos and schedule a time for them to attend and answer
> questions, time zone differences etc.
> I'm guessing your not referring to the lightning talk side with your
> second thought?
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Felix Andrews <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On second thought, I don't think we need a scheduled, structured session.
>> It would be better to have ad-hoc discussions. Just don't fill up all the
>> time with talks.
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, 28 October 2015, Felix Andrews <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 27 October 2015 at 12:31, Matthew Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I nominate David Ray to moderate. (If he wants to, of course).
>>>>
>>>> Seconded!
>>>
>>> Any ideas on how to structure this kind of session? I'm sure there will
>>> be plenty of ideas raised by Sergey, Fergal and others. It might be obvious
>>> what to focus on. Or not.
>>>
>>> I find that putting ideas into code exposes a lot of unspecified
>>> details, which may be very important in their effects. So personally I
>>> would like us to propose some concrete mechanisms, avoiding hand waving as
>>> much as possible (sure, we need hand waving sometimes). It would be good to
>>> get those people with more neuroscience knowledge involved at that detailed 
>>> level,
>>> I think.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 26, 2015, at 8:20 PM, Felix Andrews <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sergey, I would love to hear that talk. Distilled neuroscience is gold.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps, along with Fergal's talk, it could lead into a
>>>> forum/discussion on potential computational experiments inspired by
>>>> neuroscience? An explicit bridge-building exercise between theory and
>>>> practice. We would need a skilled moderator.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 27 October 2015 at 07:43, Marcus Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1, I'd be interested in your talk.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 4:40 PM Sergey Alexashenko <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey David,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I must have not been clear. I do not intend to present
>>>>>> theories from neuroscience, just evidence. For example, we now know that
>>>>>> inhibitory neurons can block off information input to an excitatory
>>>>>> neuron's cell body from one specific dendrite. That seems like it could 
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> important, but HTM has no way to account for that. There are a few other
>>>>>> similar mechanics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously, I have theories about these behaviors (and so do other
>>>>>> people), but I do not want to present them for similar reasons to those 
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> your email.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are your thoughts on that approach?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 4:18 PM, David Ray <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sergey,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you put it in context - show how the contrary opinions actually
>>>>>>> demonstrate computational viability - and not just someone's opinions? 
>>>>>>> Show
>>>>>>> how the challenging theories have a computational model which 
>>>>>>> illustrates a
>>>>>>> more efficient likelihood of prediction accuracy? Because If all the
>>>>>>> challenging theories do is propose a theory, then how is it a 
>>>>>>> contribution
>>>>>>> considering HTM theory yields actual results.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So personally I'm not interested unless the theory can demonstrate
>>>>>>> an increase in cognitive resolution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But that's just me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 26, 2015, at 5:28 PM, Sergey Alexashenko <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey everyone,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you think there would be any interest in a short talk on some
>>>>>>> neuroscience challenges to HTM theory? I am specifically thinking about
>>>>>>> dendritic computation, role of inhibitory neurons and non-Hebbian
>>>>>>> plasticity. I know this sounds dense, but I am reasonably sure I can 
>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>> it sound accessible to people who have only On Intelligence and the 
>>>>>>> white
>>>>>>> paper as their background.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>> On Oct 26, 2015 3:22 PM, "Fergal Byrne" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, either Matt will get a recording, or the speaker will, or
>>>>>>>> someone will come and use their own camera/mike. Or best, all of these.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Marcus Lewis <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Will these talks be recorded? I vote for "yes".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Matthew Taylor <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Fergal,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please edit this wiki document:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/numenta/nupic/wiki/HTM-Challenge-Community-Meetup-Planning
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>>>>> Matt Taylor
>>>>>>>>>> OS Community Flag-Bearer
>>>>>>>>>> Numenta
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Fergal Byrne
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks Matt for organising the Hangout this morning/afternoon.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > The Community Meetup on Friday, November 13th [1] is hosted by
>>>>>>>>>> Numenta but
>>>>>>>>>> > is our day. Please have your say in designing and shaping how
>>>>>>>>>> the day works.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > The current proposal is a mixture of longish talks (40-50mins
>>>>>>>>>> plus Q&A) and
>>>>>>>>>> > lightning talks (5-15mins plus Q&A).
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > We have so far pencilled in two long-form talks:
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > 1. Donna Dubinsky (Numenta co-founder and CEO) on the "Business
>>>>>>>>>> of HTM"
>>>>>>>>>> > 2. Me on "Symphony from Synapses: Neocortex as a Universal
>>>>>>>>>> > Dynamical Systems Modeller"
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > We have from 3pm until 9ish, so there's plenty of room for
>>>>>>>>>> talks of both
>>>>>>>>>> > types. I'd personally enjoy a good mixture of a few more
>>>>>>>>>> long-form and a
>>>>>>>>>> > good number of swift talks.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Matt is going to set up a Wiki page for this (he'll post a link
>>>>>>>>>> here), so
>>>>>>>>>> > please jump in with your talk proposals - specify approx length
>>>>>>>>>> of the talk
>>>>>>>>>> > so we can figure out how to schedule them.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > For those who cannot attend in person, we'll hopefully organise
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> > webcast/hangout way to deliver your contribution.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > This is all subject to objections/amendments from you guys,
>>>>>>>>>> nothing is set
>>>>>>>>>> > in stone.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Fergal Byrne
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > [1] http://www.meetup.com/numenta/events/224711563/
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Fergal Byrne, Brenter IT @fergbyrne
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > http://inbits.com - Better Living through Thoughtful Technology
>>>>>>>>>> > http://ie.linkedin.com/in/fergbyrne/ -
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/fergalbyrne
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Founder of Clortex: HTM in Clojure -
>>>>>>>>>> > https://github.com/nupic-community/clortex
>>>>>>>>>> > Co-creator @OccupyStartups Time-Bombed Open License
>>>>>>>>>> http://occupystartups.me
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Author, Real Machine Intelligence with Clortex and NuPIC
>>>>>>>>>> > Read for free or buy the book at
>>>>>>>>>> https://leanpub.com/realsmartmachines
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > e:[email protected] t:+353 83 4214179
>>>>>>>>>> > Join the quest for Machine Intelligence at http://numenta.org
>>>>>>>>>> > Formerly of Adnet [email protected] http://www.adnet.ie
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fergal Byrne, Brenter IT @fergbyrne
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://inbits.com - Better Living through Thoughtful Technology
>>>>>>>> http://ie.linkedin.com/in/fergbyrne/ -
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/fergalbyrne
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Founder of Clortex: HTM in Clojure -
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/nupic-community/clortex
>>>>>>>> Co-creator @OccupyStartups Time-Bombed Open License
>>>>>>>> http://occupystartups.me
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Author, Real Machine Intelligence with Clortex and NuPIC
>>>>>>>> Read for free or buy the book at
>>>>>>>> https://leanpub.com/realsmartmachines
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> e:[email protected] t:+353 83 4214179
>>>>>>>> Join the quest for Machine Intelligence at http://numenta.org
>>>>>>>> Formerly of Adnet [email protected] http://www.adnet.ie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Felix Andrews / 安福立
>>>> http://www.neurofractal.org/felix/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Felix Andrews / 安福立
>>> http://www.neurofractal.org/felix/
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Felix Andrews / 安福立
>>> http://www.neurofractal.org/felix/
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Felix Andrews / 安福立
>> http://www.neurofractal.org/felix/
>>
>
>


-- 
Felix Andrews / 安福立
http://www.neurofractal.org/felix/

Reply via email to