The most remarkable thing about the brain is that it wasn't designed. As a result, how the brain works is largely an irrelevant question.
Brain architecture is the result of an optimization process. So what really matters for reproducibility is the optimization problem itself.
-
-
The hypothesis space, the objective function(s). Everything else is noise.
-
Essentially: it doesn't matter what the answer is, bc one can mechanically derive it once the question has been asked. What matters is the Q
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Survival?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
not just optimisation, also iterative adaptation to evolving/co-evolving training pressures which made it robust, not over-fitted.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agreed. Like studying birds is not so relevant to airplane. Optimization may not result in the best design.
-
How to avoid local optima is more important than studying the result of local optima.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is basically what
@KordingLab and@NKriegeskorte were arguing for at COSYNE this year. I think you all have a hammer so only see nails
-
lolz. in an absolute sense, hammer is quite a compliment
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Well said! All relations (incl cell interactions) arise from necessity relations. What is the obj criterion though?? Back to metaphysics :p
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not everyone agrees with the premisehttp://romainbrette.fr/what-is-computational-neuroscience-xxiii-on-optimality-principles-in-neuroscience/ …
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.