Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!crltrx!decvax!purdue!muttiah From: muttiah@cs.purdue.EDU (Ranjan Samuel Muttiah) Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets Subject: Re: What good are neural nets? Message-ID: <10092@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Date: 22 Mar 90 06:19:32 GMT References: <68764@aerospace.AERO.ORG> <2355@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> <18697@boulder.Colorado.EDU> Sender: news@cs.purdue.EDU Reply-To: muttiah@cs.purdue.edu (Ranjan Samuel Muttiah) Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University Lines: 19 In article <18697@boulder.Colorado.EDU> bill@synapse.Colorado.EDU (Bill Skaggs) writes: >In article <2355@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU> shankar@rnd.GBA.NYU.EDU >(Shankar Bhattachary) writes: >> >> If neural nets are indeed no more effective under any circumstances >> than are more conventional methods, many of us could save ourselves >> a lot of trouble. > >but it's way >too early to despair. Like Bill says, it's way too early to throw our arms up in the air. For my two cents worth, I think a problem may be the lack of the amount applications being explored by people. Everyone seems to want to develop his own computation model of the brain (not too difficult, once you have the math going) than evaluate the models already in existence. Let's beat BP to death ! :-). On a related note, has anybody looked into the Linsker net model ? (please email if you have).