<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Gary, you wrote: "What are the alternatives?"<br><br>There is at least one alternative: the theory of practopoiesis which suggests that it is not the neural networks that "compute" the mental operations. <br>It is instead the quick adaptations of neurons who are responsible for thinking and perceiving. The network only serves the function of bringing in the information and sending it out. <br><br>The adaptations are suggested to do the central part of the cognition.<br><br>So far, this is all hypothetical. If we develop these ideas into a working system, this would be an entirely new paradigm. It would be like the third paradigm: </div><div dir="ltr">1) manipulation of symbols </div><div dir="ltr">2) neural net</div><div dir="ltr">3) fast adaptations<br><br>Danko<br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">Dr. Danko Nikolić<br><a href="http://www.danko-nikolic.com" target="_blank">www.danko-nikolic.com</a><br><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/danko-nikolic/" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/in/danko-nikolic/</a><div>--- A progress usually starts with an insight ---</div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 7:19 PM <a href="mailto:gary@ucsd.edu">gary@ucsd.edu</a> <<a href="mailto:gary@eng.ucsd.edu">gary@eng.ucsd.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">This is an argument from lack of imagination, as Pat Churchland used to say. All you have to notice, is that your brain is a neural net work. What are the alternatives?</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 4:08 AM Danko Nikolic <<a href="mailto:danko.nikolic@gmail.com" target="_blank">danko.nikolic@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><br>I suppose everyone agrees that "the brain is a physical system", <br>and that "There is no “magic” inside the brain",<br>and that '“understanding” is just part of “learning.”'<br><br>Also, we can agree that some sort of simulation takes place behind understanding.<br> <br>However, there still is a problem: Neural network's can't implement the needed simulations; they cannot achieve the same cognitive effect that human minds can (or animal minds can).<br><br>We don't know a way of wiring a neural network such that it could perform the simulations (understandings) necessary to find the answers to real-life questions, such as the hamster with a hat problem. <br><br>In other words, neural networks, as we know them today, cannot:<br><br>1) learn from a small number of examples (simulation or not)<br>2) apply the knowledge to a wide range of situations<br><br><br>We, as scientists, do not understand understanding. Our technology's simulations (their depth of understanding) are no match for the simulations (depth of understanding) that the biological brain performs.<br><br>I think that scientific integrity also covers acknowledging when we did not (yet) succeed in solving a certain problem. There is still significant work to be done.<br><br><br>Danko <br></div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Dr. Danko Nikolić<br><a href="http://www.danko-nikolic.com" target="_blank">www.danko-nikolic.com</a><br><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/danko-nikolic/" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/in/danko-nikolic/</a><div>--- A progress usually starts with an insight ---</div></div></div></div><br></div><div id="gmail-m_-3229424020171779455m_-1469727422087267219DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br> <table style="border-top:1px solid rgb(211,212,222)">
<tbody><tr>
<td style="width:55px;padding-top:18px"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:17px;color:rgb(65,66,78);font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virenfrei. <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" style="color:rgb(68,83,234)" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<a href="#m_-3229424020171779455_m_-1469727422087267219_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"></a></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 9:35 PM Asim Roy <<a href="mailto:ASIM.ROY@asu.edu" target="_blank">ASIM.ROY@asu.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">First of all, the brain is a physical system. There is no “magic” inside the brain that does the “understanding” part. Take for example learning to play tennis. You hit a few balls - some the right way and some wrong – but you fairly quickly
learn to hit them right most of the time. So there is obviously some simulation going on in the brain about hitting the ball in different ways and “learning” its consequences. What you are calling “understanding” is really these simulations about different
scenarios. It’s also very similar to augmentation used to train image recognition systems where you rotate images, obscure parts and so on, so that you still can say it’s a cat even though you see only the cat’s face or whiskers or a cat flipped on its back.
So, if the following questions relate to “understanding,” you can easily resolve this by simulating such scenarios when “teaching” the system. There’s nothing “magical” about “understanding.” As I said, bear in mind that the brain, after all, is a physical
system and “teaching” and “understanding” is embodied in that physical system, not outside it. So “understanding” is just part of “learning,” nothing more.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background:yellow">DANKO:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background:yellow">What would happen to the hat if the hamster rolls on its back? (Would the hat fall off?)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background:yellow">What would happen to the red hat when the hamster enters its lair? (Would the hat fall off?)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background:yellow">What would happen to that hamster when it goes foraging? (Would the red hat have an influence on finding food?)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background:yellow">What would happen in a situation of being chased by a predator? (Would it be easier for predators to spot the hamster?)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Asim Roy<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Professor, Information Systems<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Arizona State University<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lifeboat.com_ex_bios.asim.roy&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=oDRJmXX22O8NcfqyLjyu4Ajmt8pcHWquTxYjeWahfuw&e=" target="_blank">Lifeboat
Foundation Bios: Professor Asim Roy</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__isearch.asu.edu_profile_9973&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=jCesWT7oGgX76_y7PFh4cCIQ-Ife-esGblJyrBiDlro&e=" target="_blank">Asim
Roy | iSearch (asu.edu)</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Gary Marcus <<a href="mailto:gary.marcus@nyu.edu" target="_blank">gary.marcus@nyu.edu</a>> <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, February 3, 2022 9:26 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Danko Nikolic <<a href="mailto:danko.nikolic@gmail.com" target="_blank">danko.nikolic@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Asim Roy <<a href="mailto:ASIM.ROY@asu.edu" target="_blank">ASIM.ROY@asu.edu</a>>; Geoffrey Hinton <<a href="mailto:geoffrey.hinton@gmail.com" target="_blank">geoffrey.hinton@gmail.com</a>>; AIhub <<a href="mailto:aihuborg@gmail.com" target="_blank">aihuborg@gmail.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:connectionists@mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu" target="_blank">connectionists@mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Connectionists: Stephen Hanson in conversation with Geoff Hinton<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear Danko,<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Well said. I had a somewhat similar response to Jeff Dean’s 2021 TED talk, in which he said (paraphrasing from memory, because I don’t remember the precise words) that the famous 200 Quoc Le unsupervised model [<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en/*archive/unsupervised_icml2012.pdf__;Lw!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!PFl2URDWVshfy1BPSwAMXKYyn1wszxpN4EPzShAm3sX83AOt05MQX07oVyVLEqo$" target="_blank">https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//archive/unsupervised_icml2012.pdf</a>]
had learned the concept of a ca. In reality the model had clustered together some catlike images based on the image statistics that it had extracted, but it was a long way from a full, counterfactual-supporting concept of a cat, much as you describe below. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I fully agree with you that the reason for even having a semantics is as you put it, "to 1) learn with a few examples and 2) apply the knowledge to a broad set of situations.” GPT-3 sometimes gives the appearance of having done so, but
it falls apart under close inspection, so the problem remains unsolved.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Gary<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Feb 3, 2022, at 3:19 AM, Danko Nikolic <<a href="mailto:danko.nikolic@gmail.com" target="_blank">danko.nikolic@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">G. Hinton wrote: "I believe that any reasonable person would admit that if you ask a neural net to draw a picture of a hamster wearing a red hat and it draws such a picture, it understood the request."<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would like to suggest why drawing a hamster with a red hat does not necessarily imply understanding of the statement "hamster wearing a red hat".<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">To understand that "hamster wearing a red hat" would mean inferring, in newly emerging situations of this hamster, all the real-life implications that the red hat brings to the little animal.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What would happen to the hat if the hamster rolls on its back? (Would the hat fall off?)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What would happen to the red hat when the hamster enters its lair? (Would the hat fall off?)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What would happen to that hamster when it goes foraging? (Would the red hat have an influence on finding food?)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What would happen in a situation of being chased by a predator? (Would it be easier for predators to spot the hamster?)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">...and so on.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Countless many questions can be asked. One has understood "hamster wearing a red hat" only if one can answer reasonably well many of such real-life relevant questions. Similarly, a student has understood materias in a class only if they
can apply the materials in real-life situations (e.g., applying Pythagora's theorem). If a student gives a correct answer to a multiple choice question, we don't know whether the student understood the material or whether this was just rote learning (often,
it is rote learning). <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I also suggest that understanding also comes together with effective learning: We store new information in such a way that we can recall it later and use it effectively i.e., make good inferences in newly emerging situations based on this
knowledge.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In short: Understanding makes us humans able to 1) learn with a few examples and 2) apply the knowledge to a broad set of situations. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">No neural network today has such capabilities and we don't know how to give them such capabilities. Neural networks need large amounts of training examples that cover a large variety of situations and then the networks can only deal with
what the training examples have already covered. Neural networks cannot extrapolate in that 'understanding' sense.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I suggest that understanding truly extrapolates from a piece of knowledge. It is not about satisfying a task such as translation between languages or drawing hamsters with hats. It is how you got the capability to complete the task: Did
you only have a few examples that covered something different but related and then you extrapolated from that knowledge? If yes, this is going in the direction of understanding. Have you seen countless examples and then interpolated among them? Then perhaps
it is not understanding.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, for the case of drawing a hamster wearing a red hat, understanding perhaps would have taken place if the following happened before that:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">1) first, the network learned about hamsters (not many examples)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2) after that the network learned about red hats (outside the context of hamsters and without many examples) <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">3) finally the network learned about drawing (outside of the context of hats and hamsters, not many examples)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">After that, the network is asked to draw a hamster with a red hat. If it does it successfully, maybe we have started cracking the problem of understanding.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Note also that this requires the network to learn sequentially without exhibiting catastrophic forgetting of the previous knowledge, which is possibly also a consequence of human learning by understanding.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Danko<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dr. Danko Nikolić<br>
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.danko-2Dnikolic.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=HwOLDw6UCRzU5-FPSceKjtpNm7C6sZQU5kuGAMVbPaI&e=" target="_blank">www.danko-nikolic.com</a><br>
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_danko-2Dnikolic_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=b70c8lokmxM3Kz66OfMIM4pROgAhTJOAlp205vOmCQ8&e=" target="_blank">https://www.linkedin.com/in/danko-nikolic/</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--- A progress usually starts with an insight ---<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="gmail-m_-3229424020171779455m_-1469727422087267219gmail-m_5721046881173082574DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(211,212,222)">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="55" style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:9.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_sig-2Demail-3Futm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fsource-3Dlink-26utm-5Fcampaign-3Dsig-2Demail-26utm-5Fcontent-3Dwebmail&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=Ao9QQWtO62go0hx1tb3NU6xw2FNBadjj8q64-hl5Sx4&e=" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="46" height="29" style="width: 0.4791in; height: 0.302in;" id="gmail-m_-3229424020171779455m_-1469727422087267219gmail-m_5721046881173082574_x0000_i1026" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif"></span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
<td width="470" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:9pt 0.75pt 0.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(65,66,78)">Virus-free.
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_sig-2Demail-3Futm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fsource-3Dlink-26utm-5Fcampaign-3Dsig-2Demail-26utm-5Fcontent-3Dwebmail&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=Ao9QQWtO62go0hx1tb3NU6xw2FNBadjj8q64-hl5Sx4&e=" target="_blank">
<span style="color:rgb(68,83,234)">www.avast.com</span></a> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 9:55 AM Asim Roy <<a href="mailto:ASIM.ROY@asu.edu" target="_blank">ASIM.ROY@asu.edu</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Without getting into the specific dispute between Gary and Geoff, I think with approaches similar to GLOM, we are finally headed in the right direction. There’s plenty of neurophysiological
evidence for single-cell abstractions and multisensory neurons in the brain, which one might claim correspond to symbols. And I think we can finally reconcile the decades old dispute between Symbolic AI and Connectionism.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;background:yellow">GARY: (Your GLOM, which as you know I praised publicly, is in many ways an effort to wind up with encodings that effectively serve as
symbols in exactly that way, guaranteed to serve as consistent representations of specific concepts.)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;background:yellow">GARY: I have
<i>never</i> called for dismissal of neural networks, but rather for some hybrid between the two (as you yourself contemplated in 1991); the point of the 2001 book was to characterize exactly where multilayer perceptrons succeeded and broke down, and where
symbols could complement them.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Asim Roy<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Professor, Information Systems<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Arizona State University<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lifeboat.com_ex_bios.asim.roy&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=oDRJmXX22O8NcfqyLjyu4Ajmt8pcHWquTxYjeWahfuw&e=" target="_blank">Lifeboat
Foundation Bios: Professor Asim Roy</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__isearch.asu.edu_profile_9973&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=jCesWT7oGgX76_y7PFh4cCIQ-Ife-esGblJyrBiDlro&e=" target="_blank">Asim
Roy | iSearch (asu.edu)</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Connectionists <<a href="mailto:connectionists-bounces@mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu" target="_blank">connectionists-bounces@mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Gary Marcus<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 2, 2022 1:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Geoffrey Hinton <<a href="mailto:geoffrey.hinton@gmail.com" target="_blank">geoffrey.hinton@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> AIhub <<a href="mailto:aihuborg@gmail.com" target="_blank">aihuborg@gmail.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:connectionists@mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu" target="_blank">connectionists@mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Connectionists: Stephen Hanson in conversation with Geoff Hinton<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear Geoff, and interested others,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">What, for example, would you make of a system that often drew the red-hatted hamster you requested, and perhaps a fifth of the time gave you utter nonsense? Or say one that you
trained to create birds but sometimes output stuff like this:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><image001.png><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">One could <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">a. avert one’s eyes and deem the anomalous outputs irrelevant<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">or<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">b. wonder if it might be possible that sometimes the system gets the right answer for the wrong reasons (eg partial historical contingency), and wonder whether another approach
might be indicated.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Benchmarks are harder than they look; most of the field has come to recognize that. The Turing Test has turned out to be a lousy measure of intelligence, easily gamed. It has turned
out empirically that the Winograd Schema Challenge did not measure common sense as well as Hector might have thought. (As it happens, I am a minor coauthor of a very recent review on this very topic: <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/arxiv.org/abs/2201.02387__;!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!INA0AMmG3iD1B8MDtLfjWCwcBjxO-e-eM2Ci9KEO_XYOiIEgiywK-G_8j6L3bHA$" target="_blank">https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.02387</a>)
But its conquest in no way means machines now have common sense; many people from many different perspectives recognize that (including, e.g., Yann LeCun, who generally tends to be more aligned with you than with me).<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So: on the goalpost of the Winograd schema, I was wrong, and you can quote me; but what you said about me and machine translation remains your invention, and it is inexcusable that
you simply ignored my 2019 clarification. On the essential goal of trying to reach meaning and understanding, I remain unmoved; the problem remains unsolved. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">All of the problems LLMs have with coherence, reliability, truthfulness, misinformation, etc stand witness to that fact. (Their persistent inability to filter out toxic and insulting
remarks stems from the same.) I am hardly the only person in the field to see that progress on any given benchmark does not inherently mean that the deep underlying problems have solved. You, yourself, in fact, have occasionally made that point. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">With respect to embeddings: Embeddings are very good for natural language
<i>processing</i>; but NLP is not the same as NL<i>U</i> – when it comes to <i>understanding</i>, their worth is still an open question. Perhaps they will turn out to be necessary; they clearly aren’t sufficient. In their extreme, they might even collapse into
being symbols, in the sense of uniquely identifiable encodings, akin to the ASCII code, in which a specific set of numbers stands for a specific word or concept. (Wouldn’t that be ironic?)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">(Your GLOM, which as you know I praised publicly, is in many ways an effort to wind up with encodings that effectively serve as symbols in exactly that way, guaranteed to serve
as consistent representations of specific concepts.)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Notably absent from your email is any kind of apology for misrepresenting my position. It’s fine to say that “many people thirty years ago once thought X” and another to say “Gary
Marcus said X in 2015”, when I didn’t. I have consistently felt throughout our interactions that you have mistaken me for Zenon Pylyshyn; indeed, you once (at NeurIPS 2014) apologized to me for having made that error. I am still not he. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Which maybe connects to the last point; if you read my work, you would see thirty years of arguments
<i>for</i> neural networks, just not in the way that you want them to exist. I have ALWAYS argued that there is a role for them; characterizing me as a person “strongly opposed to neural networks” misses the whole point of my 2001 book, which was subtitled
“Integrating Connectionism and Cognitive Science.”<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the last two decades or so you have insisted (for reasons you have never fully clarified, so far as I know) on abandoning symbol-manipulation, but the reverse is not the case:
I have <i>never</i> called for dismissal of neural networks, but rather for some hybrid between the two (as you yourself contemplated in 1991); the point of the 2001 book was to characterize exactly where multilayer perceptrons succeeded and broke down, and
where symbols could complement them. It’s a rhetorical trick (which is what the previous thread was about) to pretend otherwise.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Gary<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt">On Feb 2, 2022, at 11:22, Geoffrey Hinton <<a href="mailto:geoffrey.hinton@gmail.com" target="_blank">geoffrey.hinton@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Embeddings are just vectors of soft feature detectors and they are very good for NLP. The quote on my webpage from Gary's 2015 chapter implies the opposite.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">A few decades ago, everyone I knew then would have agreed that the ability to translate a sentence into many different languages was strong evidence that you understood it.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">But once neural networks could do that, their critics moved the goalposts. An exception is Hector Levesque who defined the goalposts more sharply by saying that the ability to get
pronoun references correct in Winograd sentences is a crucial test. Neural nets are improving at that but still have some way to go. Will Gary agree that when they can get pronoun references correct in Winograd sentences they really do understand? Or does
he want to reserve the right to weasel out of that too?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Some people, like Gary, appear to be strongly opposed to neural networks because they do not fit their preconceived notions of how the mind should work.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I believe that any reasonable person would admit that if you ask a neural net to draw a picture of a hamster wearing a red hat and it draws such a picture, it understood the request.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Geoff<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 1:38 PM Gary Marcus <<a href="mailto:gary.marcus@nyu.edu" target="_blank">gary.marcus@nyu.edu</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin:5pt 0in 5pt 4.8pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Dear AI Hub, cc: Steven Hanson and Geoffrey Hinton, and the larger neural network community,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">There has been a lot of recent discussion on this list about framing and scientific integrity. Often the first
step in restructuring narratives is to bully and dehumanize critics. The second is to misrepresent their position. People in positions of power are sometimes tempted to do this.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The Hinton-Hanson interview that you just published is a real-time example of just that. It opens with a needless
and largely content-free personal attack on a single scholar (me), with the explicit intention of discrediting that person. Worse, the only substantive thing it says is false.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hinton says “In 2015 he [Marcus] made a prediction that computers wouldn’t be able to do machine translation.”</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I never said any such thing. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">What I predicted, rather, was that multilayer perceptrons, as they existed then, would not (on their own, absent
other mechanisms) <i>understand</i> language. Seven years later, they still haven’t, except in the most superficial way. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I made no comment whatsoever about machine translation, which I view as a separate problem, solvable to a certain
degree by correspondance without semantics. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I specifically tried to clarify Hinton’s confusion in 2019, but, disappointingly, he has continued to purvey misinformation
despite that clarification. Here is what I wrote privately to him then, which should have put the matter to rest:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">You have taken a single out of context quote [from 2015] and misrepresented it. The quote, which you have prominently
displayed at the bottom on your own web page, says:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal;min-height:22.9px">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:0.75in;font-stretch:normal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hierarchies of features are less suited to challenges such as language, inference, and high-level planning. For
example, as Noam Chomsky famously pointed out, language is filled with sentences you haven't seen before. Pure classifier systems don't know what to do with such sentences. The talent of feature detectors -- in identifying which member of some category something
belongs to -- doesn't translate into understanding novel sentences, in which each sentence has its own unique meaning. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal;min-height:22.9px">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">It does <i>not</i> say "neural nets would not be able to deal with novel sentences"; it says that hierachies of
features detectors (on their own, if you read the context of the essay) would have trouble <i>understanding </i>novel sentences. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal;min-height:22.9px">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Google Translate does yet not <i>understand</i> the content of the sentences is translates. It cannot reliably
answer questions about who did what to whom, or why, it cannot infer the order of the events in paragraphs, it can't determine the internal consistency of those events, and so forth.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Since then, a number of scholars, such as the the computational linguist Emily Bender, have made similar points,
and indeed current LLM difficulties with misinformation, incoherence and fabrication all follow from these concerns. Quoting from Bender’s prizewinning 2020 ACL article on the matter with Alexander Koller, <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__aclanthology.org_2020.acl-2Dmain.463.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=xnFSVUARkfmiXtiTP_uXfFKv4uNEGgEeTluRFR7dnUpay2BM5EiLz-XYCkBNJLlL&s=K-Vl6vSvzuYtRMi-s4j7mzPkNRTb-I6Zmf7rbuKEBpk&e=" target="_blank">https://aclanthology.org/2020.acl-main.463.pdf</a>,
also emphasizing issues of understanding and meaning:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-left:27pt;font-stretch:normal">
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The success of the large neural language models on many NLP tasks is exciting. However, we find that these
successes sometimes lead to hype in which these models are being described as “understanding” language or capturing “meaning”. In this position paper, we argue that a system trained only on form has a priori no way to learn meaning. .. a clear understanding
of the distinction between form and meaning will help guide the field towards better science around natural language understanding. </span></i><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Her later article with Gebru on language models “stochastic parrots” is in some ways an extension of this point;
machine translation requires mimicry, true understanding (which is what I was discussing in 2015) requires something deeper than that. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hinton’s intellectual error here is in equating machine translation with the deeper comprehension that robust
natural language understanding will require; as Bender and Koller observed, the two appear not to be the same. (There is a longer discussion of the relation between language understanding and machine translation, and why the latter has turned out to be more
approachable than the former, in my 2019 book with Ernest Davis).</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">More broadly, Hinton’s ongoing dismissiveness of research from perspectives other than his own (e.g. linguistics)
have done the field a disservice. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">As Herb Simon once observed, science does not have to be zero-sum.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Sincerely,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Gary Marcus</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Professor Emeritus</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">New York University</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt">On Feb 2, 2022, at 06:12, AIhub <<a href="mailto:aihuborg@gmail.com" target="_blank">aihuborg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Stephen Hanson in conversation with Geoff Hinton<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the latest episode of this video series for
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__AIhub.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=xnFSVUARkfmiXtiTP_uXfFKv4uNEGgEeTluRFR7dnUpay2BM5EiLz-XYCkBNJLlL&s=eOtzMh8ILIH5EF7K20Ks4Fr27XfNV_F24bkj-SPk-2A&e=" target="_blank">
AIhub.org</a>, Stephen Hanson talks to Geoff Hinton about neural networks, backpropagation, overparameterization, digit recognition, voxel cells, syntax and semantics, Winograd sentences, and more.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You can watch the discussion, and read the transcript, here:<br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__aihub.org_2022_02_02_what-2Dis-2Dai-2Dstephen-2Dhanson-2Din-2Dconversation-2Dwith-2Dgeoff-2Dhinton_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=OY_RYGrfxOqV7XeNJDHuzE--aEtmNRaEyQ0VJkqFCWw&e=" target="_blank">https://aihub.org/2022/02/02/what-is-ai-stephen-hanson-in-conversation-with-geoff-hinton/</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">About AIhub: </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">AIhub is a non-profit dedicated to connecting the AI community to the public by providing free, high-quality information through
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__AIhub.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=xnFSVUARkfmiXtiTP_uXfFKv4uNEGgEeTluRFR7dnUpay2BM5EiLz-XYCkBNJLlL&s=eOtzMh8ILIH5EF7K20Ks4Fr27XfNV_F24bkj-SPk-2A&e=" target="_blank">
AIhub.org</a> (<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__aihub.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=IKFanqeMi73gOiS7yD-X_vRx_OqDAwv1Il5psrxnhIA&e=" target="_blank">https://aihub.org/</a>).
We help researchers publish the latest AI news, summaries of their work, opinion pieces, tutorials and more. We are supported by many leading scientific organizations in AI, namely
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__aaai.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=wBvjOWTzEkbfFAGNj9wOaiJlXMODmHNcoWO5JYHugS0&e=" target="_blank">
AAAI</a>, <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__neurips.cc_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=3-lOHXyu8171pT_UE9hYWwK6ft4I-cvYkuX7shC00w0&e=" target="_blank">
NeurIPS</a>, <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__icml.cc_imls_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=JJyjwIpPy9gtKrZzBMbW3sRMh3P3Kcw-SvtxG35EiP0&e=" target="_blank">
ICML</a>, <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.journals.elsevier.com_artificial-2Dintelligence&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=eWrRCVWlcbySaH3XgacPpi0iR0-NDQYCLJ1x5yyMr8U&e=" target="_blank">
AIJ</a>/<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.journals.elsevier.com_artificial-2Dintelligence&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=eWrRCVWlcbySaH3XgacPpi0iR0-NDQYCLJ1x5yyMr8U&e=" target="_blank">IJCAI</a>,
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__sigai.acm.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=7rC6MJFaMqOms10EYDQwfnmX-zuVNhu9fz8cwUwiLGQ&e=" target="_blank">
ACM SIGAI</a>, EurAI/AICOMM, <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__claire-2Dai.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=66ZofDIhuDba6Fb0LhlMGD3XbBhU7ez7dc3HD5-pXec&e=" target="_blank">
CLAIRE</a> and <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.robocup.org__&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=yl7-VPSvMrHWYKZFtKdFpThQ9UTb2jW14grhVOlAwV21R4FwPri0ROJ-uFdMqHy1&s=bBI6GRq--MHLpIIahwoVN8iyXXc7JAeH3kegNKcFJc0&e=" target="_blank">
RoboCup</a>.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">Twitter: @aihuborg</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div id="gmail-m_-3229424020171779455m_-1469727422087267219gmail-m_5721046881173082574DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(211,212,222)">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="55" style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:9.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_sig-2Demail-3Futm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fsource-3Dlink-26utm-5Fcampaign-3Dsig-2Demail-26utm-5Fcontent-3Dwebmail&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=Ao9QQWtO62go0hx1tb3NU6xw2FNBadjj8q64-hl5Sx4&e=" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration:none"><img border="0" width="46" height="29" style="width: 0.4791in; height: 0.302in;" id="gmail-m_-3229424020171779455m_-1469727422087267219gmail-m_5721046881173082574_x0000_i1025" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif"></span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
<td width="470" style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:9pt 0.75pt 0.75pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(65,66,78)">Virus-free.
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_sig-2Demail-3Futm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fsource-3Dlink-26utm-5Fcampaign-3Dsig-2Demail-26utm-5Fcontent-3Dwebmail&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=wQR1NePCSj6dOGDD0r6B5Kn1fcNaTMg7tARe7TdEDqQ&m=waSKY67JF57IZXg30ysFB_R7OG9zoQwFwxyps6FbTa1Zh5mttxRot_t4N7mn68Pj&s=Ao9QQWtO62go0hx1tb3NU6xw2FNBadjj8q64-hl5Sx4&e=" target="_blank">
<span style="color:rgb(68,83,234)">www.avast.com</span></a> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Gary Cottrell 858-534-6640 FAX: 858-534-7029<br></div><div>Computer Science and Engineering 0404<br>IF USING FEDEX INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING LINE: <br>CSE Building, Room 4130<br>University of California San Diego -<br>9500 Gilman Drive # 0404<br>La Jolla, Ca. 92093-0404<br><br></div><div>Email: <a href="mailto:gary@ucsd.edu" target="_blank">gary@ucsd.edu</a><br>Home page: <a href="http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/~gary/" target="_blank">http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/~gary/</a></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Schedule: </span><span style="font-size:12.8px"><a href="http://tinyurl.com/b7gxpwo" style="font-size:12.8px" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/b7gxpwo</a></span><br></div><div><br></div><div><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)">Blind certainty - a close-mindedness that amounts to an imprisonment so total, that the prisoner doesn’t even know that he’s locked up. -David Foster Wallace</p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";min-height:15px;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)">Power to the people! —Patti Smith</p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)">Except when they’re delusional —Gary Cottrell</p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)">This song makes me nostalgic for a memory I don't have -- Tess Cottrell</p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";min-height:15px;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)"><i>Listen carefully,<br>Neither the Vedas<br>Nor the Qur'an<br>Will teach you this:<br>Put the bit in its mouth,<br>The saddle on its back,<br>Your foot in the stirrup,<br>And ride your wild runaway mind<br>All the way to heaven.</i></p><p style="margin:0px;font-stretch:normal;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0)">-- Kabir</p></div>
</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>