@Ylecun perpetuates false dichotomy here, between nature & nurture, without presenting data. Is there any evidence primates have fewer innate priors than mountain goats? Any proof that more innate priors actually entails less adaptivity? Better priors can yield *better* learning.https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1180171721481113602 …
-
I agree there is a tradeoff. But what would constitute evidence? How would you quantify "number of innate priors"? BTW I think even in primates most everything is innate. Maybe 99% in goats and 98% in primate--x2 higher, but still low. (Arbitrary units).pic.twitter.com/DZtVnVgB30
Peter Marler, Steve Pinker, Noam Chomsky, Elizabeth Spelke and I have all argued that the tradeoff goes in opposite direction: better priors -> better learning. just like in @ylecun 1989 tech report which showed better results as amount of built in info increased:pic.twitter.com/a49Kr1LLZj
-
-
These are not incompatible positions. Yes, better priors --> better learning. E.g. goats have very poor priors for language, so they don't learn to speak. So they rely on life strategies that involve learning fewer things, and rely more on innate strategies.
-
i worry deeply about the deep learning community because so many bill themselves as experts on learning yet fail to grasp
@TonyZador’s point above, revealing a deep lack of familiarity in ML with neighboring literature like ethology. - 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Better priors implies better learning sounds to me as a tautology. Like saying, better innate learning leads to better lifelong learning. Well, of course!!!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.