Hi Ivan: Google "category theory for computer scientists" I get this:
> [PDF]Category Theory for Computing Science - Mathematics and Statistics > http://www.math.mcgill.ca/triples/Barr-Wells-ctcs.pdf > by M Barr - Cited by 1642 - Related articles > Aug 4, 2012 - This book is a textbook in basic category theory, written specifically .... been a major source of interest to computer scientists because they are. I have not read it. I think that "cited by 1642" means its a good, high-quality book. There are several of these kinds of books -- one that I did skim, maybe a decade ago, gave all of its examples and homework problems in CaML -- it was an older book, predating Haskell. See also this: https://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/3028/is-category-theory-useful-for-learning-functional-programming Notice that the answer with largest upvotes says "category theory is type theory". For any complete newbies reading this, "int", "float", "char*", "class FooBar" and "int FooBar::myMethod(int x)" are all (C/C++/Java) examples of types. I'm making three additional claims, in addition to this highly-upvoted answer: 1) Link-grammar connectors/link-types are types, in the sense of type theory. (This is not really a new claim; the original link-grammar authors made more-or-less this same claim, in 1993, in one of their original papers) 2) Deep-learning neural-nets perform classification by classifying into types. (type-theoretical types) (this claim is kind-of shallow/stupid/"obvious", and needs to be articulated to become interesting and non-trivial.) 3) There is an almost-direct, one-to-one correspondence of deep-learning neural-nets types to link-grammar connectors/link-types, if you know where to look for them. This is the controversial claim that everyone rejects. And perhaps I am hallucinating and completely making this up. Like 2+2=3. I'm struggling with this myself, as the details remain unclear and confusing. So it's OK if you don't believe this one. But this is the claim I'm interested in. -- Linas On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 4:40 PM Ivan V. <[email protected]> wrote: > Linas, you lost me at Category theory... Nevertheless, I also find the > idea of integrating symbolic system into neural networks amusing. The proof > I really do is a recent speculation from a paper I'm writing from time to > time, just to gather my thoughts (maybe I got this from you at some point, > I really don't remember now): > > Nevertheless, symbolic approach may support structure forms on top of >> which artificial neural networks could operate, thus forming a synergy >> between the two seemingly opposite philosophies in designing AI. >> > > But then I develop things in symbolic direction because with this, I'm > currently interested only in improvement of OpenCog URE engine, as far as I > plan to offer contribution around here if the language I'm building passes > the stages a, b, c, d, and also e, just in case. > > Realizing ideas take time, and life is too short to do it all, while I'm > not a fan of bossing around... I also like to see creativity in other > people too... > > sri, 27. ožu 2019. u 20:04 Linas Vepstas <[email protected]> napisao > je: > >> Hi Sergei, >> >> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 12:14 PM Sergei Kaunov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Amused by your work, Linas, and you describe it very interesting. Where >>> should we watch further progress on the topic? >>> >> >> Thanks! Progress is hard, because several things have to happen in >> parallel. >> >> -- I (or you, or anyone else) has to think hard across multiple different >> difficult mathematical abstractions. >> >> -- Once I (or you, or anyone else) has some "great idea", it has to be >> transmitted to others, either by email or by writing papers. >> >> -- Others can understand those "great ideas" only if they have the >> appropriate mathematical background: in Ivan's case: hilbert-systems and >> natural deduction and proof theory and type theory and category theory and >> neural networks and deep learning and statistical mechanics (for example, >> the "objective function" that neural net guys love to minimize/maximize is >> exactly the same thing as a boltzmann distribution from statistical >> echanics) So my personal progress on the topic is blocked by the >> inability to communicate it to others. If you don't understand what I'm >> talking about, its deeply frustrating for me. (And this is symmetric: >> sometimes, I am told about great ideas, which I don't understand, because I >> lack the background knowledge) >> >> -- A "great idea" is great only if it *actually works*. And, here, that >> means (a) writing software (b) running experiments (c) analyzing data. (d) >> describing experimental results to others. So, not only are steps a,b,c, >> extremely time consuming, but step (d) is often mis-understood/neglected, >> because the intended audience didn't understand why the experiment is >> important. >> >> -- After you've conquered steps a,b,c,d then and only then can you do >> step e) build an insanely great demo that will wow everyone who sees it, >> even if they are a complete moron. For example, "deep fakes". You don't >> need math to know that something unusual is happening there. >> >> The pressure I'm under, that I feel, is that I've got a collection of >> "great ideas", I'm trying to articulate them, having trouble finding an >> audience, struggling with steps a,b,c,d and meanwhile everyone is shouting >> out loud "you guys are a bunch of losers because you don't have step e) you >> suck!" and dealing with the psychological and financial fallout from that. >> >> I'm not unique, here -- most researchers/scientists deal with these same >> issue. The commonly accepted solution for this is to create collaborations >> and teams -- "division of labor" -- and tehre's chicken-and-egg problems to >> solving that, also. >> >> --linas >> >> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "opencog" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/0b258284-cb0c-45ae-8d34-9f74d7ee00f9%40googlegroups.com >>> . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> -- >> cassette tapes - analog TV - film cameras - you >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "opencog" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA355QGo1zA8oCUZ3guEwMFymqJ7-PA5ydTJdMx2Sf%2B-ypQ%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA355QGo1zA8oCUZ3guEwMFymqJ7-PA5ydTJdMx2Sf%2B-ypQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "opencog" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAB5%3Dj6Xt0ze729QzdMVFyU4Q%2BYPB7hib_7n%3D4iNguzmJ2Em2SA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAB5%3Dj6Xt0ze729QzdMVFyU4Q%2BYPB7hib_7n%3D4iNguzmJ2Em2SA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- cassette tapes - analog TV - film cameras - you -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36XhRzY0Wez4n0VhYSw_NYfZMVY3fU-eOPe2g7h-%2B2ZAQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
