So I want to write neural network that would process N-symbol words.
Should I provide 26 symbol neurons for each letter position, so that they give 1.0 for their matching letter? Should I duplicate position for each recognized words? I.e. vocabulary of 1000 N-sized words would require 1000*N*26.
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-02 15:05
Is it possible to run all words in parallel on GPU?
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-02 15:10
Lastly, is it possible to implement Lisp SEXPs using neural network?
Here's the real question: why do you want to write neural network x. Depending on the answer, there's a good chance you might be giving yourself more work than you need.
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-02 16:55
>>5
So that NPCs could associate in-game processes with spoken words.
>>1
It's a lot more complicated than that. A lot. It's very unlikely you'll be able to teach language to a brain whose only external stimuli are letters. For example, what is "a letter"? Your brain immediately associates it with "visual symbol" or "smallest fraction of a word". But that's only because of the phrase I wrote right before I asked you that. Had I not mentioned that meaning of the word "letter", you might have thought of an mail envelope and such.
To handle and distinguish all of those, such a brain would need to actually understand and, to a certain extent, perceive the various concepts you present to it. Anything it can't perceive or even imagine would be abstract, and abstract things are difficult to learn.
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-03 8:20
>>7
consider fuzzy sexps, that can adapt to underlaying model.
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-03 8:22
>>8 whose only external stimuli are letters.
Not just letter, but also their position in time.
Blind people somehow manage to learn language, despite their only stimuli being letters.
how is it relevant to 'their only stimuli being letters'
blind people learn their first language just like you learned it - aurally from their parents when they cannot yet read and don't know what letter it. deafblind from birth.. afaik they are taught with special gestures (tactile) instead of sound. anyway the concept of letter is a quite abstract concept and i seriously doubt it could be understood without knowing a language beforehand (you may not realize it but our language it's our means to think abstractly and letter is an abstraction, those who don't learn a human language to age of ~6y.o. or so will be half-sapient forever, see feral children)
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-03 9:05
>>13
The concept of a formant or any other sound is a quite abstract concept and i seriously doubt it could be understood without knowing a language beforehand (you may not realize it but our language it's our means to think abstractly and sound is an abstraction, those who don't learn a human language to age of ~6y.o. or so will be half-sapient forever, see feral children)
syllables, short words... concept of letters isn't basic for human mind in any way, just think that some nations don't even have an alphabet and use some kind of hieroglyphs instead
Name:
Anonymous2013-03-03 9:54
>>19
letters are short words... concept of sound isn't basic for human mind in any way, just think that some nations don't even have an sounds and use some kind of letters instead