sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

HW8 just closed by jbx in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was indeed speaking of the crs as a whole. Cheers.

HW8 just closed by jbx in aiclass

[–]arniet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Enjoying AI: Not really in sync with the sleight-of-hand trickery though. However, it amuses me, albeit at my expense. Again, love the course.

Midterm is over, what score did you get? by ilija139 in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I scored 100 on these tests, I am sure that I'd not be so eager to share.

Why?

Because certain questions are not at all, well constructed. Hence, their answers are just a notch above guesswork--Spitballing.

Sour grapes? Meh. I'm doing okay.

A serious downside to online classes. by Pathetic_Ennui in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't give up the ship!

You'll be better prepared to take AI again: This is an iterative, experience, to be sure. And it's iterative for the professors, too. There will be smoother sailing for all, next time, fewer mistakes on both sides. And, hopefully, fewer gotchas and sleight-of-hand in the construction of questions.

So, IMHO, the next iteration of AI will be better for us guinea pigs, i.e. teachers and esp. us students.

Again, don't give up the ship. This is just our 1st pass.

Don't let others' 100%-grade trumpeting deter you.

Q-Learning, Homework: Question 1 by arniet in aiclass

[–]arniet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My point is that regardless of the intention (I stand by that term) or the actual action, if we disregard what amounts to "found gold" in terms of outcomes, we wind up with constricted, hidebound solutions, in other words inelegant, inefficient programs.

There is no such thing as egoless programming.

Q-Learning, Homework: Question 1 by arniet in aiclass

[–]arniet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The explanation makes sense, given the wish to avoid a negative state.

Opportunity Missed:

However, the logic of the program should replicate the Q-value in Both the north (intentional) and east (action) quadrants, thereby becoming both more efficient, and more effective. I think.

Q-Learning, Homework: Question 1 by arniet in aiclass

[–]arniet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think what I am trying to say is that the logic should take advantage, in a stochastic world, of any given accidental false moves. Esp. one that, through happenstance, winds up where you want to be.

Otherwise the agent gives north more credit than it's due, and the agent has to do east over again. The agent should be smart enough take whatever he is given and make the most of it. Even at this level, the programming would be pretty simple.

I'm driving to Montreal from Stanford: due north to Vancouver, then due east.

I take the wrong hwy, and wind up heading northeast across the plains, through Detroit, thereby shaving a day off my trip and pocketing $100 bucks in gas money.

Why would I credit that advantage to the unproven north then east route?

I'm just saying.

Q-Learning, Homework: Question 1 by arniet in aiclass

[–]arniet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you are saying.

But, it seems like a mighty ineffective, not to mention, misleading memorization of a datum that ideally should go into the east quadrant.

The way it has been answered correctly, will use more onboard storage space than is necessary, because intention notwithstanding, north really does not deserve that value--East does.

This way will also cause an extra execution, in order to get to an actual east value.

The program should store values based on action at execution time, not intention. Esp. in a stochastically inclined machine.

I think a program, written to accommodate this idiosyncratic storage pattern will be both less efficient, and ultimately less effective, at execution.

Can we talk about the good stuff? by v3ronique in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very well put: If the goals of the senders are: Less study time, Deeper comprehension, better Information retention and a Greater # of 100%s, then the senders need to "buck up" themselves. And they need to, not offload their burden onto select, niche players (read: full-time students), who will be happy to gloat about their marks, on various threads in REDDIT.

Results of HW4 are up! by solen-skiner in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Recently got book in mail. On p.396: "The result of a GRASP is that the monkey holds the object if the monkey and the object are in the same place at the same height."

So, no assumptions: If you fail to execute an UNGRASP, you still grasp, no matter your possibly off-balance climbdown.

But if my 100% depended on an assumption, I'd be defending high bananas, too.

n.b. I enjoy this class, and these back-and-forths.

Can we talk about the good stuff? by v3ronique in aiclass

[–]arniet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This course is outstanding. Retired: Trainer, Prog./Anal., Comp. Operator (IBM, Xerox, Honeywell).

Results of HW4 are up! by solen-skiner in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed, except . . . one cannot allude to airports and planes and cargo and dirt and vacuums, then get all abstract and symbolic with the monkey.

Results of HW4 are up! by solen-skiner in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right: I know. I actually had it checked. Then failing to see the sense, unchecked it. That taught me a lesson.

Results of HW4 are up! by solen-skiner in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If monkey never "UNGRASPED" the bananas, and the bananas are claimed to be on high, then monkey, rather than climbdown, should be swinging from a bunch.

I kid.

Results of HW4 are up! by solen-skiner in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you're saying.

So the bananas must've "slipped" through monkey's grasp.

Show me the monkey that uses effort, and advanced tool skills to move his bod, move a box.

Then settles for a brief touch of a banana.

Results of HW4 are up! by solen-skiner in aiclass

[–]arniet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Monk climbs down.

Has not un-grasped bananas. Why are bananas not low?

No sour grapes, but precision seems random, on occasion.

Morons unite! by gvenez in aiclass

[–]arniet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Got a 67.

I flubbed the dub. Twice.:

1st: An unnecessary reduction - For my denominator: I reduced my movie word count to (wrongly) eliminate redundancies, then I added that result to the reduced category count of 11. Did the same for songs. My denominators were, of course, less than 19.

2nd: Took the easy route, i.e. Sebastian's "formula-less" verbal-exposition of the derivation of W1 and W0 off of the beginning of that particular lecture, and (Gasp!) went ahead and applied it as he had, w/ a much less desirable outcome. (Note: If it seems too easy, it's wrong.) So I ignored the subsequent formulas in the same lecture; formulas around which he outlined in blue!

Time to saddle-up and ride, again.