|
|
|
|
|
by michael_nielsen
4585 days ago
|
|
My current plan is to describe some pretty recent results -- most likely, the big breakthrough on ImageNet by Krizhevsky, Sutskever and Hinton (http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~ilya/pubs/2012/imgnet.pdf), which uses convolutional nets. I may also describe the famous Google-Stanford "cat neuron" paper (http://ai.stanford.edu/~ang/papers/icml12-HighLevelFeaturesU... ). But at this point things are moving so quickly that I'll keep my options open, and if more exciting things come up, I may change my plans. Of course, there's a tremendous amount going on, so my broader philosophy is to focus on fundamentals. Readers who thoroughly master the core ideas shouldn't have much trouble later getting up to speed with the result-of-the-month. |
|
kernels learned by the first convolutional layer (the figure 3. on page 6) have uncanny resemblance to Gabor function-modeled orientation-selective cells ("bars and grating cell") in the primary visual cortex. Looks like computers are on the right track :)
http://www.cs.rug.nl/~petkov/publications/bc1997.pdf
"The discovery of orientation-selective cells in the primary visual cortex of monkeys almost 40 years ago and the fact that most of the neurons in this part of the brain are of this type ..."
The difference here is a "number game" - visual cortex contains cells whose receptive fields' positions, eccentricities, sizes, orientation, number of excitatory and inhibitory zones (e.g. Fig.1 in the link) make a reasonable coverage for the space of possible values. Ie. the number of these cells is in the millions vs. 96. Of course it is only a matter of computing power to run all reasonable combinations of kernels emulating the real visual cortex, yet it would put immense computational challenge onto the second and next layers until we understand what [should] happens there.