It’s generally agreed machine learning and AI provide neuroscience with tools for analysis and theoretical principles to test in brains, but there is less agreement about what neuroscience can provide AI. Should computer scientists and engineers care about how brains compute, or will it just slow them down, for example? Chris, Sam, and I discuss how neuroscience might contribute to AI moving forward, considering the past and present. This discussion also leads into related topics, like the role of prediction versus understanding, AGI, explainable AI, value alignment, the fundamental conundrum that humans specify the ultimate values of the tasks AI will solve, and more. Plus, a question from previous guest Andrew Saxe. Also, check out Sam’s previous appearance on the podcast.
0:00 – Intro
5:00 – Good ol’ days
13:50 – AI for neuro, neuro for AI
24:25 – Intellectual diversity in AI
28:40 – Role of philosophy
30:20 – Operationalization and benchmarks
36:07 – Prediction vs. understanding
42:48 – Role of humans in the loop
46:20 – Value alignment
51:08 – Andrew Saxe question
53:16 – Explainable AI
58:55 – Generalization
1:01:09 – What has AI revealed about us?
1:09:38 – Neuro for AI
1:20:30 – Concluding remarks
Show notes: Paul Humphreys’ website.Zac Irving’s website.Emergence: Emergence: A Philosophical Account. (book by Paul)The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Science. Mind Wandering: Mind-Wandering is...
Jon and I discuss understanding the syntax and semantics of language in our brains. He uses linguistic knowledge at the level of sentence and...
Follow Julie on Twitter: @julie_grollier. Check out Julie’s website, with links to papers and lots of good summaries of things we discuss, like Memristors,...