IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

monkeys learn to use brain-machine interface

KP_PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Thu Oct 16 06:52:10 EST 2003

"BilZ0r" <BilZ0r at TAKETHISOUThotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94168DEE266C8BilZ0rhotmailcom at
| Catastrophic forgetting is what happens
| when you train a neural net to do a
| certain task, and then we you train it to
| do a new task, it is completely
| unable to do the old task.
| This can be overcome by training the
| net at the old task intermitantly
| between trials and the new task.
| Interestingly (and this is what I was
| getting at in my OP), when you do the
| intermitant 'reminding' of the old task,
| so you get a net that can do the
| two tasks, the nodal connection
| strengths are completely altered from
| the | original task. i.e. for a net to
| remember 2 things, the nodes arn't a
| superposition of the patern for task 1
| and task 2, they are completely
| remodeled.

Thanks for this explanation.

>From the perspective in which I work,
my reaction was, "Of course" - be-
cause the 'complete remodeling'
"addresses" the underpinning inform-
ation 'via' its cross-correlations.

The analogous thing occurs within
biological nervous systems.

NDT's view on it is briefly discussed
in AoK, Ap6.

Biological nervous systems don't do
it like neural nets - they don't 'cram'
everything into a single collection of
'nodes' and their interactions.

In biological nervous systems, there's
a lot of hierarchical processing, which
is, nevertheless, integrated via global
TD E/I-minimization.

It's the global-integration, via TD E/I-
minimization, that rigorously-couples
all of the hierarchical stuff across its
hierarchy, and with respect to physical
reality - via TD E/I-minimization's rig-
orous coupling to WDB2T.

Global-integration via TD E/I-minimiza-
tion 'knows' that Correct solutions cor-
respond to WDB2T ^ -1, so they just
'cut-to-the-chase', 'blindly' and auto-
matically 'seek' TD E/I-minimization,
and information-convergence occurs
as a 'blindly'-automated by-product
of such TD E/I-minimization.

What I've been working to do with
NDT's synthesis of the Neuroscience
experimental results is to show folks
thatm, iff they acquire an understand-
ing of how and why nervous systems
process information via 'blindly'-auto-
mated TD E/I-minimization, they can
achieve 'transcendance' with respect
to the 'blind'-automation.

In the dark-'light' of the Savagery that
the 'blind'-automation precipitates with-
in 'blindly'-automated Human interactive
dynamics, elimination of the 'blind'-auto-
mation is easily seen to be a Worthy

I'm sorry that my reply only addresses
the neural-net focus of yours. I long ago
took a look into 'neural nets' and found
their approach lacking-necessary-sub-
stance, in particular, in the way they
were trying to do everything within a
single collection of 'cloned' 'nodes' - so
I 'looked-elsewhere'.

I've also been long-aware that the work
I've done has fed-back into 'neural-net'
efforts. It's been routinely both Sorrow-
ful and funny to see the AI folks' efforts
'discovering' what's been handed-to
them in NDT's stuff.

It's been as if folks've seen the work I've
done as being 'exempt' from any need
for citation - as if I'm some sort of 'daddy'
whose only purpose has been to 'give
other researchers' their weekly-'allowances',
and that, because I'm this 'daddy', 'there's
no need' for otherwise Accepted Priority.

It's funny to me that it's been so.

And it's been killing-me, 'two'.

Part of it is that folks presume that the
traditional route has been open to me,
but it has not been.

They feel it's 'OK' to usurp the work I've
done, 'because', 'all I'd have to do to re-
ceive credit for the work I've done would
be to go to grad school' - 'merge with the
way things are supposed to be'.

But I tried all of that back in the 70's, and
'the system' rejected me - be-cause my
work was, then, already so far ahead of
'the system' that no one who acted on be-
half of 'the system' could See its stuff.

They 'just' rejected it all, abjectly.

So, how could I have 'merged with the sys-

Now, there's this tacit 'conspiracy' that
derives in the fact that so many folks've
'borrowed' from the work I've done, without
crediting it, that doing so, now, is 'unthink-
able, because everyone knows that doing
so would result in a pan-Academia 'scandal'.

Part of what's funny, though, is that, if I 'go
dark', folks bash me for 'withholding' the
work I've done :-]

Don't I realize that I'm their 'daddy', and that,
'of course', I have to just give them their
'allowances'? :-] [show them how to do
their work, so that they can 'earn' their

I've been trying =HARD= to avoid 'scandal' -
to "hold open the door", but it's obvious that
that's why folks have come to treat me as
their 'daddy'.

It's been funny.

But it's also been killing me.

[Please Forgive me my Lament, but
it's what seeing the "of course" stuff
in your reply, and seeing how old the
same-stuff is in NDT, evoked within
me. And please don't receive my
comments as if they are directed
'to you', personally. They are not. They
are directed to 'the system's coersed,
and coersing, consensus, that sanctions
such theft of Life itself from folks like me.]

ken [K. P. Collins]

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net