Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
Aidan Rocke
An applied mathematician working on morphogenesis and foundations for intelligent behavior. // Rules for scientific discourse:
849
Tweetovi
552
Pratim
357
Osobe koje vas prate
Tweetovi
Aidan Rocke 16 h
'Fractional Calculus and Variational Mechanics' // An explanation of how the fractional calculus allows an extension of the Lagrangian to non-conservative systems.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke proslijedio/la je tweet
Trends in Cognitive Sciences 26. stu
Bridging Motor and Cognitive Control: It’s About Time! , , & Romy Frömer highlight recent work revealing similarities in the algorithms that control our thoughts and movements ,
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 18 h
Polymath is not quite Manhattan-style. :) For the Manhattan project you have hundreds of incredibly stressed scientists working on an existential crisis, not a nice theoretical problem. The polymath effort was also started by scientists with zero relevant prior experience.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 19 h
I also don't know if I am too nice but I think you are much too modest. I think a lot of your ideas are pretty cool. :)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 19 h
The thing is nobody has the answer to this question so diversity of thought is more important than a consensus established by a select few. As for elitism, I believe we should take it from nobody. I might add that we are all here to learn from each other right? :)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @ampanmdagaba @NoahGuzman14
, do you guys think this can work for problems in theoretical neuroscience? I mean interesting problems which won't be worked out in the next 10 years otherwise as they simultaneously require a combination of skills and solving a coordination problem.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
'The Polymath Project is a collaboration among mathematicians to solve important and difficult mathematical problems by coordinating many mathematicians to communicate with each other on finding the best route to the solution.' link:
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
I think that for very abstract problems like this it helps to work on concrete problems to develop an intuition. That would be my approach at least. Then you could find the common thread between different problems, a unifying perspective.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
Aha, this is an interesting idea. :) This is probably the reason why deep learning works on many different data sets. You might want to checkout this paper:
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
This isn’t a very formal argument but even if I formalise it, I doubt this is half the picture. Interesting research has been done on the probability of chaos in higher-dimensional dynamical systems for example: which is probably very relevant. 3/3
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
So even if it may be embedded in a more complex and higher-dimensional dynamical system, its proper phase-space probably has much lower dimension relatively speaking. 2/3
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
Here's my take on the question so far: If a system is stable it must obey a homeostatic principle and therefore be controllable. Controllability also entails that it has a causal description in terms of local interactions. 1/3
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
You could define an equivalence relation on all dynamical systems where you map a dynamical system to the dimension of its phase space. If you order these systems in terms of their dimension you will find that you don't have an upper-bound.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DaltonSakthi
Do you mean an intrinsic dimension for particular data or all data? If the former then that's the basis of manifold learning, finding the intrinsic dimension of the data. If you mean an intrinsic dimension for all data I am not sure that would work.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @NoahGuzman14 @xaqlab i 10 ostali
Physical processes which may be described using a system of ODEs or PDEs.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @xaqlab @KordingLab i 10 ostali
Is there a part of my question which is unclear? Or is there is a false axiom embedded in my question? I actually wonder why I haven't seen any papers on the Manifold Hypothesis which directly attempt to address this question.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @xaqlab @KordingLab i 10 ostali
Might there be a reason why stable physical processes would tend to have low-dimensional phase spaces? 2/2
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @xaqlab @KordingLab i 10 ostali
Here's the problem in two parts: In order to do ML we need to collect a lot of data from a data-generating process so this process must be stable. Empirically we observe that the intrinsic dimension d of the data is generally much smaller than the ambient dimension D. 1/2
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @KordingLab @xaqlab i 10 ostali
Note: I think this might be one of the most interesting open problems in machine learning and neural information processing, unless a theoretical neuroscientist has already adequately addressed this question in a slightly different setting.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Aidan Rocke 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @KordingLab @xaqlab i 10 ostali
Finally, we are all on Twitter to exchange ideas and not one-up each other so I hope everyone feels free to share their perspective. :)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"