[comp.ai.digest] current connectionist literature, etcetera

NICK@AI.AI.MIT.EDU (Nick Papadakis) (06/03/88)

Date: Thu, 2 Jun 88 04:34 EDT
From: lugowski@resbld.csc.ti.com
To: ailist@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: current connectionist literature, etcetera

Responding to John Nagle's CURRENT connectionist literature inquiry:

In my opinion, there is no good comprehensive book on current
connectionist thinking.  For one thing, folks are too busy going to
conferences.  For another, everyone has their own little garden to
tend.  Recent book content of interest includes "Neural Darwinism" (to
judge from preprints) as well as the commentaries by Jim Anderson in
"Neuroscience", a recent compendium of not-so-recent papers.  You
don't want to miss a not-yet-out MIT/Bradford Books book, Pentti
Kanerva's 1984 thesis (CSLI 84-7), if you haven't read it yet.  Other
than that, I'd repeat the obligatory advice: monitor technical
reports, the journals "Nature" and "Neural Networks" and the two
connectionist mailing lists.  To apply for subscription to those
lists, send to:

   connectionists-request@q.cs.cmu.edu    (sparsely firing connectionists)
   neuron-digest-request@csc.ti.com       (everyone, sparse and otherwise)


As for categorizing work, anything small-grained, bottom up and
parallel probably can pass for connectionist.  It's not the formalism,
it's the claim, really: One must make massively parallel claims
pertaining to massive parallelism.  (Smirk, lest I get crucified.)

Simulated annealing is "very connectionism".  Some of the nicest
connectionist work of late (Durbin & Willsaw, Cambridge, also stuff
out of Los Alamos) has at least references to simulated annealing as
benchmark.  The trick one would like to see done is casting simulated
annelaing as a localized computation *without* the closed-form cost
function or globally computed energy -- everything strictly "grassroots".

As for tensor calculus, the very idea appears contra connectionism,
I hold with those who would like to see discrete, adpative and local
formalisms take over the domains historically ceded to 19th century's
closed-form mathematical analysis and its applications.  Tensor
calculus?  Sure, but check them determinants at the bar, pardner...

[Above opinions are strictly mine.]

		-- Marek Lugowski

		   lugowski@resbld.csc.ti.com
		   lugowski@ngstl1.ti.com
		   marek@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu