Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTypes of Cognition and its Implications for future High-Level Cognitive Machines
132
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Camilo Miguel Signorelli
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
This work summarizes part of current knowledge on High-level Cognitive process and its relation with biological hardware. Thus, it is possible to identify some paradoxes which could impact the development of future technologies and artificial intelligence: we may make a High-level Cognitive Machine, sacrificing the principal attribute of a machine, its accuracy.
rate research
Read More
Can computers overcome human capabilities? This is a paradoxical and controversial question, particularly because there are many hidden assumptions. This article focuses on that issue putting on evidence some misconception related with future generations of machines and the understanding of the brain. It will be discussed to what extent computers might reach human capabilities, and how it could be possible only if the computer is a conscious machine. However, it will be shown that if the computer is conscious, an interference process due to consciousness would affect the information processing of the system. Therefore, it might be possible to make conscious machines to overcome human capabilities, which will have limitations as well as humans. In other words, trying to overcome human capabilities with computers implies the paradoxical conclusion that a computer will never overcome human capabilities at all, or if the computer does, it should not be considered as a computer anymore.
Natural learners must compute an estimate of future outcomes that follow from a stimulus in continuous time. Widely used reinforcement learning algorithms discretize continuous time and estimate either transition functions from one step to the next (model-based algorithms) or a scalar value of exponentially-discounted future reward using the Bellman equation (model-free algorithms). An important drawback of model-based algorithms is that computational cost grows linearly with the amount of time to be simulated. On the other hand, an important drawback of model-free algorithms is the need to select a time-scale required for exponential discounting. We present a computational mechanism, developed based on work in psychology and neuroscience, for computing a scale-invariant timeline of future outcomes. This mechanism efficiently computes an estimate of inputs as a function of future time on a logarithmically-compressed scale, and can be used to generate a scale-invariant power-law-discounted estimate of expected future reward. The representation of future time retains information about what will happen when. The entire timeline can be constructed in a single parallel operation which generates concrete behavioral and neural predictions. This computational mechanism could be incorporated into future reinforcement learning algorithms.
Despite the widely-spread consensus on the brain complexity, sprouts of the single neuron revolution emerged in neuroscience in the 1970s. They brought many unexpected discoveries, including grandmother or concept cells and sparse coding of information in the brain. In machine learning for a long time, the famous curse of dimensionality seemed to be an unsolvable problem. Nevertheless, the idea of the blessing of dimensionality becomes gradually more and more popular. Ensembles of non-interacting or weakly interacting simple units prove to be an effective tool for solving essentially multidimensional problems. This approach is especially useful for one-shot (non-iterative) correction of errors in large legacy artificial intelligence systems. These simplicity revolutions in the era of complexity have deep fundamental reasons grounded in geometry of multidimensional data spaces. To explore and understand these reasons we revisit the background ideas of statistical physics. In the course of the 20th century they were developed into the concentration of measure theory. New stochastic separation theorems reveal the fine structure of the data clouds. We review and analyse biological, physical, and mathematical problems at the core of the fundamental question: how can high-dimensional brain organise reliable and fast learning in high-dimensional world of data by simple tools? Two critical applications are reviewed to exemplify the approach: one-shot correction of errors in intellectual systems and emergence of static and associative memories in ensembles of single neurons.
Several analog and digital brain-inspired electronic systems have been recently proposed as dedicated solutions for fast simulations of spiking neural networks. While these architectures are useful for exploring the computational properties of large-scale models of the nervous system, the challenge of building low-power compact physical artifacts that can behave intelligently in the real-world and exhibit cognitive abilities still remains open. In this paper we propose a set of neuromorphic engineering solutions to address this challenge. In particular, we review neuromorphic circuits for emulating neural and synaptic dynamics in real-time and discuss the role of biophysically realistic temporal dynamics in hardware neural processing architectures; we review the challenges of realizing spike-based plasticity mechanisms in real physical systems and present examples of analog electronic circuits that implement them; we describe the computational properties of recurrent neural networks and show how neuromorphic Winner-Take-All circuits can implement working-memory and decision-making mechanisms. We validate the neuromorphic approach proposed with experimental results obtained from our own circuits and systems, and argue how the circuits and networks presented in this work represent a useful set of components for efficiently and elegantly implementing neuromorphic cognition.
Physical symbol systems are needed for open-ended cognition. A good way to understand physical symbol systems is by comparison of thought to chemistry. Both have systematicity, productivity and compositionality. The state of the art in cognitive architectures for open-ended cognition is critically assessed. I conclude that a cognitive architecture that evolves symbol structures in the brain is a promising candidate to explain open-ended cognition. Part 2 of the paper presents such a cognitive architecture.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
