Literature DB >> 33643075

Note on the Reliability of Biological vs. Artificial Neural Networks.

Ruedi Stoop1,2.   

Abstract

Various types of neural networks are currently widely used in diverse technical applications, not least because neural networks are known to be able to "generalize." The latter property raises expectations that they should be able to handle unexpected situations with similar success than humans. Using fundamental examples, we show that in situations for which they have not been trained, artificial approaches tend to run into substantial problems, which highlights a deficit in comparisons to human abilities. For this problem-which seems to have obtained little attention so far-we provide a first analysis, based on simple examples, which exhibits some key features responsible for the difference between human and artificial intelligence.
Copyright © 2021 Stoop.

Entities:  

Keywords:  artificial vs. biological neural networks; generalization ability; influence of evolution; network solution reliability; size and structure of problem solutions

Year:  2021        PMID: 33643075      PMCID: PMC7907171          DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2021.637389

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Physiol        ISSN: 1664-042X            Impact factor:   4.566


  5 in total

1.  Nucleotypic effects without nuclei: genome size and erythrocyte size in mammals.

Authors:  T R Gregory
Journal:  Genome       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.166

2.  Integrated genomic and proteomic analyses of a systematically perturbed metabolic network.

Authors:  T Ideker; V Thorsson; J A Ranish; R Christmas; J Buhler; J K Eng; R Bumgarner; D R Goodlett; R Aebersold; L Hood
Journal:  Science       Date:  2001-05-04       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Size and shape of the cerebral cortex in mammals. I. The cortical surface.

Authors:  M A Hofman
Journal:  Brain Behav Evol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 1.808

4.  Evolution of genome size and complexity in Pinus.

Authors:  Alison M Morse; Daniel G Peterson; M Nurul Islam-Faridi; Katherine E Smith; Zenaida Magbanua; Saul A Garcia; Thomas L Kubisiak; Henry V Amerson; John E Carlson; C Dana Nelson; John M Davis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Mammalian cochlea as a physics guided evolution-optimized hearing sensor.

Authors:  Tom Lorimer; Florian Gomez; Ruedi Stoop
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.