Gary Marcus

i don't know a system that learns translational invariance, and i'd think you would want to have it. you could use a different starting point, though.

My PhD thesis is one example. Slow feature analysis had a proof-of-concept too. Note that visual cortex is NOT convolutional...and this is an example of something you can learn from neuroscience, which you tend to ignore :) http://alpha.tmit.bme.hu/speech/docs/education/02_DileepThesis.pdf …

i don't think we really know how cortex does translation invariance.

i think we know quite a bit about it.

Well, your thesis gives some well-known facts about cortical circuits and derives one possible theory of what those circuits might be doing, but I don't think there is anything like proof there, unless there is some recent study I don't know about.

Gary you know this well, there is nothing called proof is science. This is not mathematics. We can talk about evidence...

sure, but i don't think there is compelling evidence; feel free to lay it out if you disagree. but no neuroscientist that i have spoken with in last six months (or six years) is of the opinion that there is anything yet like clarity about how the brain works. cc @AdamMarblestone

It could be that you are asking the wrong questions to these neuroscientists. If you ask "do you know how the brain works" they will say no, and mostly cog-scientists will say no if you ask them "do you know how the mind works?".