Ugh... substitute "trials" with "memory"... grrr.. i.e. more trials with less memory will more closely resemble the original observation; more trials with more memory will more closely resemble the noise in the observation.
You're correct, but aren't the robots:
a) observing the scene;
b) recreating the scene/trajectory as they see it; and
c) watching again and repeating
?
1) In the case of unlimited trials what will happen is that fewer clusters will be formed because the robots will follow the "average" trajectory of noise
2) In the case of limited trials more clusters will form (and they will be closer to the original trajectory because the amount of noise contributing to the trajectory is less) and the trajectories they follow will more closely resemble the original "course"
Maybe I'm missing something important. I'll read the paper again.
No, they showed that what their algorithm produced is what they designed the algorithm to do.
There is no fitness function or anything.
It's just... I'm not sure how to explain it. You can't form a hypothesis, develop and algorithm to mimic that hypothesis and then draw any conclusions because the algorithm does what it was designed to do. That just begs the question, as I initially said, and shows nothing.
How does it gel with the summary? I.e. how much memory do ants have -- none, 12 steps (maybe alcoholic ones do?), or unlimited? Do ants follow pheremones (unlike the robots in the summary, article and paper)?
Ok, I just read the how draft paper and I need to apologise: it's worse than I thought
Further, "diversity" is not the same as species abundance (and number of clusters doesn't play a part at all, and to a lesser extent neither does the size of the clusters unless there is some kind of boundary). I don't have the data but I wonder if the people running this -- what is it anyway? it's not an experiment, surely -- computer program realise that.
The difference was clear and significant; with limited memory an average of 2.8 clusters of average size 8.3, with unlimited memory 3.9 clusters of size 6.9.
Why is this clustering interesting? Well it’s because the number and size of clusters in the meme pool are good indicators of its diversity. Think of each cluster of related memes as a ‘tradition’. A healthy culture needs a balance between stability and diversity. Neither too much stability, i.e. a very small number (in the limit 1) of traditions, or too much diversity, i.e. clusters so small that there are no persistent traditions at all. Perhaps the ideal balance is a smallish number of somewhat persistent traditions.
No shit that the unlimited memory will result in fewer clusters -- they have, well, unlimited memory so they have much more (unlimited actually) scope for creating new clusters.
This study of some hypothesis (hypothesis) is literally begging the question by answering the question with... err the question itself.
I guess this is why I dislike most models. This "study" demonstrates nothing. Absolutely nothing except that the model behaves according to the model. Maybe a new phrase is needed: "begging the model".
Did anyone else notice that the lead researcher was Gordon Shumway?
I have insider news. Of the 7,000 responses 6,945 were from this individual.
They're the developers who get things done.
You misunderstood the parent. They said:
Unfortunately many software developers these days are completely lost without an IDE
This is quite different to saying, for example, "Here is a developer who can continue to function without an IDE". I agree with the parent... many developers these days cannot function without an IDE; without one they have no clue where to start.
Honestly, this has to be the stupidest
Subject line says it all; I expected more than that article provided. Please.
Pity I didn't click the Post Anonymously checkbox.
Posting AC because I moderated the parent up.
“Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life.”
Confucius
Although the quote above is somewhat idealistic (unless you can work for yourself or happen to have a pretty non-typical workplace there are "political" considerations as well), in essence it's spot on. At the end of the journey we all end up as a pile of bones or ash. I'd rather spend that journey being poor and doing something I love than rich and doing something I hate (you will feel like a slave and not enjoy all that life offers). Each to their own, though.
Do you believe the BBT has been debunked by cosmologists properly accredited by degree-granting institutions?
At this point in time, no.
The Tao is like a stack: the data changes but not the structure. the more you use it, the deeper it becomes; the more you talk of it, the less you understand.
