Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mojuba 4962 days ago
On the other hand, there is nothing a neural net can do that a Turing machine can't do (perhaps even better?).
2 comments

There is no "a neural net". Which model do you mean? Certainly not the deep belief networks under discussion in the article.

edit: I'm not sure I was clear enough-- the term "neural network" is a misnomer that encompasses extremely different models that are largely unrelated except for being vaguely inspired by the brain. A vanilla multilayer-perceptron is essentially a generalization of logistic regression. Restricted Boltzmann Machines are different beasts-- they're a restriction of undirected graphical models made amenable to efficient training. Recurrent neural networks aren't in any way a minor extension of other neural networks-- you need different terminology to talk meaningfully about them and they essentially don't have reliable training algorithms. This latter class can be viewed as Turing-equivalent computation, but they're not at all the same as the models in the original article.

Neural Nets cannot loop (unless they are recurrent neural nets) and are memory bound.
That's also what mojuba was referring to.