Freaky — Why Yoshua Bengio’s new “Consciousness Prior” paper is strange to me?

Yoshua’s new paper essentially deals with discussing non-trivial priors in some learning model, i.e. babies’ brains are pre-equipped with some “physics priors”, namely the ability for babies to intuitively know laws of physics, pertinently while learning by reinforcement.I won’t go into mathematical detail regarding Bengio’s paper here, but you may better understand Bengio’s paper by viewing a paper of mine written last year. (A clear overview is found here).

Although the aforesaid overview entails the complex topic of supermanifolds, and thus somewhat goes beyond manifolds as Bengio’s paper entails, the overview is quite clear, and may help readers here to better digest Bengio’s paper.

On a separately fun note, I shall underline after the meme below, why Bengio’s paper is quite freaky to me.



When I read the abstract, I quickly thought that Bengio was talking about learning some laws of physics, in conjunction with RL (reinforcement learning).Surely enough, reading the entire paper he does mention babies and intuitive physics, and RL.

Last year I wrote a paper called “Thought Curvature”, about utilizing Supermathematics to learn laws of physics in tandem with RL (reinforcement learning) in the Supermanifold regime. (See a clear overview here)

Some differences are:
(a) Unlike Bengio’s paper, my paper presented a somewhat thorough way to do an experiment to test for the viability of the somewhat novel structure introduced in my paper.

(b) My papers lack the entire description about “mapping and verifying conscious actions in culture” via language, whereby my papers don’t intend to describe a framework for consciousness.

Footnote:
This is perhaps promising news though, it’s freaky to me as I didn’t think my papers were arXiv worthy yet, but Yoshua’s presentation here is perhaps changing my mind.

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2kkADwo