stochasticity

I've been taking grad school courses in AI, and I'd say it's all rule based...stochasticity doesn't change that.

They are just the result of randomness, we ended up where we are out of stochasticity.

There's also some randomness and stochasticity to the process, and you just have to accept it.

Maybe, but do we know if this stochasticity is fundamental to our consciousness?

I think you drastically underestimate stochasticity, the sheer number of people on twitter, and how actions at the margin can drive someone over a precipe.

If you define a rule as something that can include stochasticity, then how is a neural network something more than a stochastic graph with rules for communication?

Batch tends to get you into easy-to-find local optimum, and you have no stochasticity that temporarily pops you out of a local minimum and allows you to find a better one.

They're more specialized, make it easier to incorporate domain knowledge, and using stochasticity compensates for local optima.

Bayesian stats actually let you integrate stochasticity into deterministic models fairly easily, in a way you can't really do with frequentist stats.

If it should have, is its exclusion presumably due to the fact that it was published so recently?I think this is a nice article, but I can't help but be frustrated by the stochasticity of HN since I posted it yesterday :D

In complex systems, stochasticity, nonlinearity, feedback loops and higher-order effects dominate.