@GaryMarcus In your paper "DL: A Critical Appraisal" you mention a test you did for generalization during 1998. Its is still a good generalization test? Which is in your opinion the best generalization test for a AI?
-
-
Replying to @peremayol
There are (and should be) many different ways to assess generalization, but you might start with
@LakeBrenden’s updates to my late 90’s work. And look at@dileeplearning’s work on how DQN fails in tiny changes to Atari games.1 reply 2 retweets 8 likes -
Our blogs and papers highlight important aspects of generalization in vision, dynamics, and concept learning. https://www.vicarious.com/blog/
@vicariousai1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @dileeplearning @GaryMarcus and
Do you consider at Vicarious that your tech & team have achieved generalization?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @peremayol @GaryMarcus and
Of course not. We have good generalization in some limited settings. We think we have some of the right ingredients, but a lot more work remains.
4 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @dileeplearning @peremayol and
@MelMitchell1 compare the above to the screenshot from another company I shared recently ... just sayin’.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GaryMarcus @dileeplearning and
Yup, I'm a big fan of
@dileeplearning and@vicariousai
Just to clarify from my previous posts: I wasn't saying that DeepMind doesn't hype their work; they absolutely do. I was just questioning your criticism that they don't have a successful deep RL *commercial product*.2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MelMitchell1 @GaryMarcus and
What I said: "Marcus compares DeepMind with IBM Watson. But IBM made huge promises & put out a lot of hype on how their system would very soon revolutionize healthcare, law, etc. Has DeepMind ever made promises about how it would commercialize Deep RL in the short-term?"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MelMitchell1 @GaryMarcus and
I also said that I find their mission statement--"solve intelligence"-- to be nonsensical. I think they have overhyped the significance of their work for general AI, but I haven't seen the kind of hype from them about near-term world-changing *products* (as IBM was guilty of.)
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
Ah, on that we can agree.
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.