Connectionists: Weird beliefs about consciousness

[Juyang Weng]

Brad,

You wrote "Itti Koch & Niebur (1998) ... salience computation in vision"

With due respect, I think salience is a very small piece of attention.
Maybe 10%?
Based on studies in six disciplines, attention is mainly top-down, guided
by self-generated intent.
That is how our DN models a general framework of attention, represented in
the state/action that the network self-generated.  In this model, salience
is about 10%, when state/action is "none".

Sorry, the meth is a lot more complex.  I am trying to communicate in an
intuitive way.

Best regards,
-John

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:31 AM Brad Wyble <bwyble at gmail.com> wrote:

> Tsvi you wrote:
>
>>
>>  For example in cognitive psychology there is a rich literature on
>> salience (which again is a bit different from salience in the neural
>> network community).  Salience is a dynamic process which determines how
>> well a certain input or input feature is processed. Salience changes in the
>> brain depending on what other inputs or features are concurrently present
>> or what the person is instructed to focus on.  There is very little
>> appreciation, integration or implementation of these findings in neural
>> networks, yet salience plays a factor in every recognition decision and
>> modality including smell and touch.
>>
>>
> I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by this, since
> computational modelling of salience is a major thrust of computer vision.
> Itti Koch & Niebur (1998) has been cited 13,000 times and there are
> hundreds of papers that have elaborated on this ANN approach to salience
> computation in vision.  Is this not what you're asking for?  If not, what
> am I misunderstanding?
>
> kind regards
> -Brad
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Juyang (John) Weng
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/pipermail/connectionists/attachments/20220216/04f1887e/attachment.html>