Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump
Quote | Reply
I thought that this was a fascinating read and wanted to share. Plus, it has the obligatory Trump angle making it irresistible for LR consumption:

"A few years ago, a team of British researchers decided to revisit the facts of King George III’s madness with a new analytic tool. They loaded some 500 letters written by the king into a machine-learning engine and laboriously trained the system to recognize various textual features: word repetition, sentence length, syntactical complexity, and the like. By the end of the training process, the system was able to predict whether a royal missive had been written during a period of mania or during a period of sanity."


I wonder what it might find in looking at Trump's lifetime "literary works".

https://www.wired.com/...ficial-intelligence/







"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."
Last edited by: MOP_Mike: Nov 14, 18 9:44
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [MOP_Mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MOP_Mike wrote:
I thought that this was a fascinating read and wanted to share. Plus, it has the obligatory Trump angle making it irresistible for LR consumption:

"A few years ago, a team of British researchers decided to revisit the facts of King George III’s madness with a new analytic tool. They loaded some 500 letters written by the king into a machine-learning engine and laboriously trained the system to recognize various textual features: word repetition, sentence length, syntactical complexity, and the like. By the end of the training process, the system was able to predict whether a royal missive had been written during a period of mania or during a period of sanity."


I wonder what might would find in looking at Trump's lifetime "literary works".

https://www.wired.com/...ficial-intelligence/





Since I'm not on Twitter, are there "sane" tweets interspersed with the nonsense that make the head lines?
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You don't need AI to tell you which Trump tweets were written by His Orangeness and which were written by an aide.
If its misspelled and sounds like the ramblings of some angry, paranoid, drunk you just met on the subway then its Trump.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [MOP_Mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If nobody understands Friston's theory, maybe he's a genius.

On the flipslide... if nobody understand Friston's theory, maybe he insane.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BLeP wrote:
If nobody understands Friston's theory, maybe he's a genius.

On the flipslide... if nobody understand Friston's theory, maybe he insane.

Maybe genius and insanity are merely separated by a Markov Blanket.... ;-)


"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [MOP_Mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Look! Only the 2,346,013th LR post about Trump! ;-)




"Politics is just show business for ugly people."
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [big kahuna] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
big kahuna wrote:
Look! Only the 2,346,013th LR post about Trump! ;-)

Guilty! I really mentioned the Trump hook as a joke, for exactly that reason.

Seriously, I think Friston's Free Energy theory is fascinating. I haven't looked at the maths, but I'm sure that they're quite opaque and beyond me. But, even a mere engineering Oompa Loompa of Science like myself can appreciate how his ideas about prediction error reduction in an inference engine affect AI and even consciousness. Cool stuff.


"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [MOP_Mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
One thing I can say as I'm reasonably familiar with using AI/ML in this context is that 500 written letters is not anywhere near large enough to train an accurate AI/ML system.
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This largely depends on the task, and the type of classifier you're trying to build.
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sure. I'm referring to this specific use case which involves analyzing text and sentiment/patterns and comparing across others. 500 records isn't sufficient by orders of magnitude. The company I work for are using AI/ML to structure and analyze text for various purposes and it involved 100s of millions of records (through far more complex than what is in this OP) and we learned over the years what it takes to train such a system.

Simpler models might be fine with fewer records though off the top of my head I can't think of any where 500 records would be sufficient but I'm no expert on AI/ML, I'm just specifically familiar with this type of use case.
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, but here we're looking at a simple binary classifier. With 500 letters, you can use SVMs, or RF, and build a pretty efficient classifier, even with cross validation. I'm assuming the letters are more than just a few words. Now of course if you want to do refined sentiment analysis, 500 letters is nowhere near enough. My team and I have done a couple of sentiment analysis using twitter data, in a biomedical context, so I'm intimately familiar with all this as I dabble in it all the time :-)

But for a simple classifier between 'normal' and 'nuts' usually 500 letters would be plenty enough, and an SVM would have ample discriminatory power.
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Surely it depends how detailed a conclusion you're trying to reach.

If all you're looking for is a a binary "This guy is not a fucking idiot" vs. "This guy is a fucking idiot" then pick any 5 tweets at random and you'll have a pretty clear answer.
Quote Reply
Re: Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence...and Trump [RCCo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lol. Well done, well done.
Quote Reply