• Breaking News

    Monday, December 2, 2019

    Home Unlabelled How to reconstruct OR rules from data Computer Science

    How to reconstruct OR rules from data Computer Science

    December 02, 2019

    How to reconstruct OR rules from data Computer Science

    How to reconstruct OR rules from data

    Posted: 02 Dec 2019 01:32 AM PST

    I have a boolean table with ~100000 rows and 3000 columns. I know that many of these columns are redundant because they are the result of OR between some other columns in the table (even maybe up to 200 other columns). The structure is also nested - some columns may be constructed from ORing other columns and then themselves be involved in creating a new column.

    My goal is to reduce this table into "base columns" and a list of OR rules which allow me to reconstruct the original data.

    Is there any way to do this in a reasonable amount of run-time? (not O(2^n) ...)

    submitted by /u/orenmatar
    [link] [comments]

    The Shortest Path Through A Maze by Edward Moore

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 10:55 AM PST

    SOLVED :)
    Hi there!

    I've been doing some research on shortest path algorithms and I've been across the mention of this paper several times. However, I've been unable to find the original from 1959 anywhere. I've tried Google Scholar, but to no avail, yet the paper is referenced in materials such as "Introduction To Algorithms".

    I'm rather curious as to what it exactly contains, so I may refer to it in my future work, but I don't feel I can refer to a work I haven't read. I appreciate any help on the subject :)

    ​

    I hope this is within the rules of this community :)

    submitted by /u/tikki100
    [link] [comments]

    Don’t you think we live in beautiful world when we can listen to the guy who started LINUX talking in 2019, it blows my mind. A lot of Science fields would kill to listen some of its great minds talking nowadays.

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 01:20 PM PST

    Business Office | Illinois Computer Science

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 11:32 PM PST

    What is the purpose of this course (Analysis of Algorithms) on Coursera?

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 12:43 PM PST

    I'm interested in learning Algorithms but slightly confused with this newer course available on Coursera at: Analysis of Algorithms (https://www.coursera.org/learn/analysis-of-algorithms/home/info)

    I see that the courses most popular for learning algorithms via MOOCs are the Princeton Algorithms 1 and the Standford Analysis of Algorithms. Both seem to be highly regarded.

    With that said, what's this new course about? Is it a pre-requisite to either of these courses, is it meant to be a similar offering as the Stanford course?

    submitted by /u/skyloather123
    [link] [comments]

    The Programmer’s Challenge to Animal Rights - seeking written arguments that address these issues.

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 10:07 PM PST

    Written by /u/curi I am posting it here because I am also curious.

    Claim: Animals are complex robots. Humans are different because they have general intelligence – the thing that AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) researchers are trying to program but haven't yet been able to. All known and documented animal behavior is compatible with animals lacking general intelligence (example).

    Animals are built with with different materials (more carbon, less metal). This difference is irrelevant. Similarly, the "artificial" in Artificial General Intelligence doesn't matter either.

    Animals are fundamentally similar to a self-driving car, to board game playing software in a robot with (or without) an arm that can move the pieces around the board, and to "AI" controlled video game characters. Those, like all human-written software that exists today, are all examples of non-AGI (non-general intelligence) algorithms. And the lack of a physical body in some cases important (a robot body could be built and added without changing the intelligence of the software).

    Brains of both animals and humans are universal classical computers (Turing complete), just like Macs and iPhones, which run software. The relevant differences are software algorithm differences. People who deny this are ignorant and/or unscientific.

    Further Explanation

    All software we know how to write today is inadequate to achieve general intelligence. So to claim animals have moral rights like humans, people should argue that animals do things which fundamentally differ from current software. So far I have been unable to find any serious attempt to do this.

    Alternatively, someone could come up with a distinguishing feature of software algorithms other than having or lacking general intelligence, show that some animals have that feature, and explain why that feature has moral relevance. I've also been unable to find any serious attempt to do this.

    Whether general intelligence has moral relevance is non-obvious. Regardless, a reasonable person should agree it might have major moral relevance and therefore this is an issue worth investigating for those curious about animal rights. If there is no animal rights literature trying to do this sort of analysis, and addressing these issues, that's a significant gap in their arguments.

    People denying that general intelligence has moral relevance should specify what else humans have, which robots lack, which they think has moral relevance. A common answer to that is the capacity to suffer. I have been unable to find any animal rights literature that tries to differentiate humans or AGIs from self-driving cars and non-AGI software in terms of ability to suffer. What is it about a human's software, what trait matters other than general intelligence, that grants the capacity to suffer? If they answered that, then we could investigate whether animal software has that trait or not.

    I think capacity to suffer is related to general intelligence because suffering involves making value judgments like not wanting a particular outcome or thinking something is bad. Suffering involves having preferences/wants which you then don't get. I don't think it's possible without the ability to consider alternatives and make value judgments about which you prefer, which requires creative thought and the ability to create new knowledge, think of new things. This is a very brief argument which I'm not going to elaborate on here. My main goal is to challenge animal rights advocates. What is their position on this matter and where are their arguments?

    What I've mostly found is that people don't want to think about computer algorithms. They don't know how to program and they aren't scientists. They don't know (or deny without educated arguments) that brains are literally universal classical computers (Turing complete), that information and computation is part of physical reality and physics, that human minds are literally equivalent to some sort of software, and other things like that. That's OK. Not everyone is an expert.

    That's why I've been asking (see the comments in addition to the post) to be referred to literature from someone who does know how to program, understands some of these basic issues, and then makes a case for animal rights. Where are the people with relevant expertise about computers and AGI who favor animal rights and write arguments? I can't find any. That's bad for the case for animal rights!

    Note: My relevant views on AGI are mainstream for the field. I disagree with the mainstream views in the AGI field on some advanced details, but the basic stuff I'm discussing here is widely agreed on. That doesn't prove it's true or anything, but a mainstream view merits some analysis and argument rather than being ignored. (Even obscure views often merit a reply, but I won't get into that.) If animal rights advocates have failed to consider mainstream AGI ideas, that's bad.

    Consciousness

    Besides suffering and general intelligence, the other main trait brought up in animal rights discussions is consciousness. If animals are conscious, that gives them moral value. These three traits are related, e.g. consciousness seems to be a prerequisite of suffering, and consciousness may be a prerequisite or consequence of general intelligence.

    What computations, what information processing, what inputs or outputs to what algorithms, what physical states of computer systems like brains indicates or is consciousness? I have the same question for suffering too.

    Similar questions can be asked about general intelligence. My answer to that is we don't entirely know. We haven't yet written an AGI. So what should we think in the meantime? We can look at whether all animal behavior is consistent with non-AGI, non-conscious, non-suffering robots with the same sorts of features and design as present day software and robots that we have created and do understand. Is there any evidence to differentiate an animal from non-AGI software? I'm not aware of any, although I've had many people point me to examples of animal behavior that are blatantly compatible with non-AGI programming algorithms. Humans are different because lots of their behavior is not explainable in terms of current software algorithms. Humans create new knowledge, e.g. about spaceships and vaccines, that isn't programmed in their genes. And humans do that regarding many different topics, seemingly all, hence the idea of "general" intelligence. I have yet to see evidence that any animal does that on even one topic, let alone generally.

    Many of the arguments about consciousness involve the rejection of what I regard as science. E.g. they advocate dualism – they claim that there is something other than the material world. They claim that consciousness is a fundamental, non-physical part of reality. They deny that physics can explain and account for everything that exists.

    I regard dualism as bad philosophy but I won't go into that. I'll just say that if the case for animal rights relies on the rejection of modern physics and the scientific-materialist view of the world, they've got a serious problem which they should address. Where can I read literature telling me why I should change my view of science and accept claims like theirs, which addresses the kind of doubts an atheist who believes in objective physical reality would have? I haven't gotten any answers to that so far. Instead I'm told assertions which I regard as factually false, e.g. that information is not physical. People who say things like that seem to be unfamiliar with standard views in physics (example paper).

    The Argument for Conservatism

    Animal rights advocates claim that, if in doubt, we should err on the side of caution. If the science and philosophy of mind isn't fully figured out, then we should assume animals have moral value just in case they do. Even if there's only a 1% chance that animals have rights, it's a bad idea to slaughter them by the millions. I agree.

    Pro-life (anti-abortion) advocates make the same argument regarding human fetuses. The science and philosophy aren't fully settled, so when in doubt we should avoid the chance of murdering millions of human beings, even if it's a low chance. I agree with that too. I think most animal rights advocates disagree with that or refuse to take it into account so that they can favor abortion. I think this indicates some political bias and double standards. I imagine there are some pro-life animal rights activists, but I think most aren't, which I think is screwy.

    Despite agreeing with these arguments, I'm pro-abortion and pro-slaughtering-farm-animals. The reason I favor abortion is I don't have any significant doubt about whether a 3 month old fetus, which doesn't not yet have a brain with electrical activity, is intelligence. I haven't carefully researched the scientific details about abortion (I would if I was actually deciding the law), but from what I've seen, banning third trimester abortions is a reasonable and conservative option.

    The reason I favor slaughtering cows is that I have no significant doubt about whether a cow has general intelligence. I've seen zero indicators that it does, and I've debated many people about this, asked many animal rights advocates for things to read which argue their case, asked for examples of animals doing things which are different than what a non-AGI robot could do, and so on. The total lack of relevant counter-argument from the other side is just the same as with abortion and is about equally conclusive. When all the arguments go one way, one can reasonably reach a conclusion and act on it instead of endlessly doubting. (When argument X has logical priority over Y, then Y is excluded from "all the arguments". And when argument P is conclusively refuted by argument Q, then P is excluded from "all the arguments".)

    My Expertise

    Because I'm asking for arguments from someone familiar with software and AGI rather than from just anyone, I think it's fair that I share my own background.

    I'm a philosopher and programmer. My speciality is epistemology (the philosophy of knowledge, including how to think, learn and reason, and how to evaluate ideas and arguments). I study and contribute to the Critical Rationalist epistemology of Karl Popper and David Deutsch, which I believe is important to making progress on AGI. David Deutsch, a physicist, philosopher and programmer, was my mentor and taught me a lot about philosophy and physics. He's an award-winning pioneer of quantum computing, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and an author.

    I'm a professional programmer with over a decade of work experience, but the software I work on isn't related to AGI. I've read books about AI, watched talks, learned and coded some of the algorithms, talked with people in the field, etc.

    Conclusion

    Non-programmer animal rights advocates ought to be able to see that someone, some expert, should address the issue of whether humans are animals are differentiated by general intelligence. They should argue that animals have general intelligence (or argue that humans don't have it) or explain some other sort of software/algorithm/code difference between animals and present day, non-AGI robots and software. If no one can do that and address the computational issues, the remaining option in favor of animal rights is to reject science.

    I'm seeking thoughtful, competent written arguments address these issues. Blog posts are OK, not just academic material. I challenge anyone who favors animal rights to refer me to such literature in the comments below.

    submitted by /u/TheCriticalRat
    [link] [comments]

    In need to rediscover fascination

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 03:35 PM PST

    Hello Reddit,

    I am about to finish highschool and head off to university. The past 3 years have been full of multiple school related tasks leaving little to no time to enjoy learning more about the wonderful field of computers. Before I was encapsulated within the "school grind" I always enjoyed discovering advancements, various applications, and fields within computer science and technology in general. I write this post to ask you to share any media or texts to help me (or anyone) rekindle interests in the world of computers and be inspired.

    Thank you!

    submitted by /u/sharmak86
    [link] [comments]

    6th grade me solved P=NP… i don’t know how y’all didn’t think of this ������

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 02:08 PM PST

    Trouble in choosing a career.

    Posted: 01 Dec 2019 01:30 PM PST

    Hi everyone, I am a Computer Science student with not so much interest in the field (yes I know that sounds stupid :/) but I'm just in it now and can't back out of course. I've realized I'd probably have to build my interest in the field. I am confused as to what kind of work I actually want to do in the whole computer science field. I hope someone can understand what I'm trying to say. I want to get an internship in Summer 2020 but I don't have a good resume because I don't have any experience, people told me to put in-class projects in the resume. I'd love if anyone could guide me with this as to how you should put class projects in etc.

    Anyone would like to suggest me something, give any advice, what to learn first and what are the important things to know etc (I believe I do not have very good coding skills) please please reply.

    submitted by /u/odallay
    [link] [comments]
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment