I think “surely” is appropriate here actually... On (1): that the brain uses distributed codes is well established empirically and not really a Q anymore, (2) Most relational reasoning is learned. There may be some relations or concepts that are innate, but they’re limited, IMO.
-
If we it was hard to find neurons in higher-order areas that responded to stimuli, and when they did they only responded to one (note: cells in these studies usually responded to multiple stimuli), that would at least not falsify a localist account. The current data does.
there are many connectionist models with localist output schemes (eg a node cat, anode dog etc) w variable activity levels that are thresholded by winner take all that behave exactly like this. localism is about what nodes stand for, not whether they have firing rates or real #s
-
-
Those localist output schemes are kludgy, and NN modellers know that. A human’s output for ‘cat’ is very high D! And I never said it’s about firing rates: it’s the fact that cells respond to multiple distinct stimuli that disproves localism.
-
every node in alexnet etc is localist and responds to different degrees to multiple inputs. you are disregarding the whole field.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.