Fergal, This is such an accurate statement. *"It seems at first glance that you're just using SP, which is perhaps the least powerful part of HTM. I think a saccading system which also does Temporal Pooling (which we haven't quite got yet) would be able to do a much better job on this kind of task.."*
Saccading[or sensori mortor] methods are so fundamental to the theory of the brains working. On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Fergal Byrne <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi An Qi, > > That's very interesting, thanks for sharing. Could you place your code and > setup on Github so we can take a look at exactly what you did? It seems at > first glance that you're just using SP, which is perhaps the least powerful > part of HTM. I think a saccading system which also does Temporal Pooling > (which we haven't quite got yet) would be able to do a much better job on > this kind of task, but 89.6% is still a very good start for a plain > SP-based approach. > > Very well done! Hopefully we can help you do even better. > > Regards, > > Fergal Byrne > > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 7:00 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> Sorry for the last email. Thx to the rich formatting :( ... I have to >> type again. >> >> Recently, I got the result of the test. I followed the source code and >> built the Spatial Pooler + KNN classifier. Then I extracted images from >> MNIST dataset(Train/test : 60000/10000) and parsed them to the model. I >> tried to test with different parameters (using small dataset: Train/Test - >> 6000/1000 ), the best recognition result is about 87.6%. After that, i >> tried the full size MNIST dataset, the result is 89.6%. Currently, this is >> the best result I got. >> >> Here is the statistics. It shows the error counts for each digits. the >> Row presents the input digit. the column presents the recognition result. >> Most of the "7" are recognized as "9". It seems the SDR from SP is still >> not good enough for the classifier. >> >> I found some interesting things. When I let the "inputDimensions" and >> "columnDimensions" be "784" and "1024", the result will be around 68%. If i >> use "(28,28)","(32,32)" and keep others the same, the result will be around >> 82%. That 's a lot of difference. It seems the array shape will effect SP a >> lot. >> >> Did any one get a better result? Does any one have some suggestion about >> the parameters or others? >> >> Thank you. >> An Qi >> Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology - Nakagawa Laboratory >> 2-24-16 Naka-cho, Koganei-shi, Tokyo 184-8588 >> [email protected] >> > > > > -- > > Fergal Byrne, Brenter IT > > http://inbits.com - Better Living through Thoughtful Technology > http://ie.linkedin.com/in/fergbyrne/ - https://github.com/fergalbyrne > > Founder of Clortex: HTM in Clojure - > https://github.com/nupic-community/clortex > > Author, Real Machine Intelligence with Clortex and NuPIC > Read for free or buy the book at https://leanpub.com/realsmartmachines > > Speaking on Clortex and HTM/CLA at euroClojure Krakow, June 2014: > http://euroclojure.com/2014/ > and at LambdaJam Chicago, July 2014: http://www.lambdajam.com > > e:[email protected] t:+353 83 4214179 > Join the quest for Machine Intelligence at http://numenta.org > Formerly of Adnet [email protected] http://www.adnet.ie >
