Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm as bullish on AGI as anyone in the medium term, but deep learning is not even playing the same game as AGI, let alone in the same ballpark or having the potential to achieve it.

Deep learning is still mere perception. It doesn't handle memory or processing, it just transforms input into output, typically trained by Big Data, way bigger than necessary statistically speaking, given the world we live in.

AGI requires super aggressive unsupervised learning in recurrent networks, likely with specialized subsystems for episodic and procedural memory, as well as systems that condense knowledge down to layers of the network that are closer to the inputs. At a minimum. And nobody is really working on any of that yet (or at least succeeding) because it's really damn hard.

That's why everyone in "AI" is rebranding as a deep learning expert, even though deep learning is really just 1980s algos on 2016 hardware - you gotta sex up feed forward backprop or you don't get paid.

Edit: to be fair, robot control is much simpler than AGI, and might be mostly solved with deep learning somewhat soon, I forgot the context of your post.



>Deep learning is still mere perception. It doesn't handle memory or processing,

There's more going on than convolutional neural nets. Architectures with memory and attention mechanisms do exist.

As examples: https://arxiv.org/abs/1506.03134 https://deepmind.com/blog/differentiable-neural-computers/


Sure, and I probably shouldn't have glossed over that. That sort of research is definitely progress, though it's not paradigm shifting in any way. I do think that we are getting past perception slowly but surely, I just don't think we're there yet.

What really doesn't exist is any meaningful stab at unsupervised (or self-supervised) training on completely unstructured inputs or any sort of knowledge condensation/compression, at least for time dependent problems. These are of paramount importance to the way we think, and to what we can do.

There's a lot of trivially low hanging fruit, too - I still have yet to see even a grad school thesis that starts with an N+M node recurrent network and trains an N node subnetwork to match the outputs based on fuzzed ins, and then backs that out into an unsupervised learning rule that's applicable to multiple problems. Or better, a layered network that is recurrent but striated, that tries to push weights towards the lower layers while reproducing the same outputs (hell, even with a FF network this would be an interesting problem to solve if it was unsupervised). These are straightforward problems that would open up new avenues of research if good methods were found, but are mostly unexplored right now.

I could be wrong, if I had real confidence that we were close I'd be working on this stuff, but I'm collecting a paycheck doing web dev instead...


Sequence predicting RNNs are basically unsupervised, in that they can learn from lots raw of unlabelled data. And they learn useful internal representations which can be adapted for other tasks. There is lots of old work on unsupervised learning rules for RNNs, including recurrent autoencoders and history compression.


This just came out from DeepMind:

Differentiable neural computers - https://deepmind.com/blog/differentiable-neural-computers/

> we introduce a form of memory-augmented neural network called a differentiable neural computer, and show that it can learn to use its memory to answer questions about complex, structured data

So it seems that deep neural nets can have memory mechanisms and be trained to solve symbolic operations.


I'm not talking about AGI at all! Just robot control. It's a difficult problem sure, but not that difficult. There has been massive progress on it, and related problems. I have no doubt we will have 'solved' it in at a decade.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: