Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1375222 Posts in 65096 Topics- by 57351 Members - Latest Member: SSoft_boi

April 07, 2020, 10:12:54 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperTechnical (Moderator: ThemsAllTook)The grumpy old programmer room
Pages: 1 ... 293 294 [295]
Print
Author Topic: The grumpy old programmer room  (Read 612061 times)
qMopey
Level 5
*****


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5880 on: October 28, 2019, 10:19:31 AM »

Then you have the philosophical question, maybe we just interpolate data ourselves too? We can't really produce thing that don't exist, we mostly rearrange what's existing, what's creativity?

Depends on what you believe in terms of free will and ideas. If an idea arrives it can be "new" information, but then again, it could be really old information, i.e. something passed on from one's ancestors in some esoteric manner.

For DNNs though, they do interpolate data quite well. It's popular right now because they are the best strategy to solve qualitative problems, especially in computer vision. If some other strategy were better we would all switch.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #5881 on: October 28, 2019, 10:00:17 PM »

That's the problem, it's belief not facts Tongue

I do have an "equation" for creativity though lol, it's the redux is basically a distance to "known form" there is a boundary in which thing get increasingly too "alien", art move that boundary. It's also relative because knowledge is relative, what's new for you isn't new for me, I lament the lack of creativity in X, but for you it might be a revelation, then you add meaning and relatedness as the value of "newness", it might be new but is it worth it? yet again it's relative. In general it mean new thing close the (personal and relative) boundary have more value, too far it's foreign, too inside it's safe and relative, familiar but not new, might be even boring. I had another dimension (it was triangle) but I can't remember now lol. But basically creativity is cultural and personal, not an absolute metric. I needed that representation because i'm interested in computer creativity, so I needed to fix a relative starting point for a potential algorithm that generate some "value".

Wait I found back teh thread that explain it lol
https://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=48981.msg1156678#msg1156678
Quote
on creativity we can pose the problem as such: let say there is a set A of all creations, B is a set in A that is all created work, then creativity is all work in A that increase set B that was not in B prior /obviously as the set B is increased/. let's call d the distance between two different work, originality is such that d is as big as possible for single work toward all the other work in B. then there a fitness score f /the purpose/ such as the work please to an audience. creativity is maximizing a work such such as f and d is big when increasing B. low d is clone, low f is random. we can define two strategy to increase B creatively, one is exploitation by having a big f and the second is exploration by having a big d. the problem therefore is in defining f and d. in reality f and d vary accross culture and individual, so there is a sensibility modifier, however we can first solve them assuming they are constant first.
Quote
okay let's call 'description' the series of parametrized steps to create a work. the current description is the current 'assumption'.

let's call frustration the creation of works with low scores, it increase with the number of low score works, once the frustration reach a certain score the system challenge the description.

let's call boredom the creation of score with consistent high f low d, increased by each succesful works with low d, past enough boredom the system challenge the description.

the description is challenged by testing the validity of any of its proposition by switching, adding or removing elements of a proposition. then scoring the description to evaluate the contribution of the elements. similarly the system can try to add or remove element to test its contributions. so the system form belief about the importance of each element of a description.

how can we call low f high d ? ie original but purposeless random work



a more complex system evaluate a description per 'intent' and form multidimensional belief of the description with intent as context. intents being specific set of fitness born from experiential system such as angelina, pleasing a specific audience being just a subset of this, another one would be 'how to make the player cry', this last example prompt the question about how to make a crude system such as it can form such intent? how to give the system a set of standard that can evolve to create intent?
Logged

kason.xiv
Level 0
**


View Profile
« Reply #5882 on: November 20, 2019, 06:36:43 AM »

I've been desperately trying to write a template library and link it to my project (CMake) - to no avail... it's turning me seriously grumpy (and old) :<
Logged
Prinsessa
Level 10
*****


Ava Skoog


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5883 on: November 20, 2019, 06:46:06 AM »

As in C++ templates/metaprogramming, like the STL?
Logged

kason.xiv
Level 0
**


View Profile
« Reply #5884 on: November 26, 2019, 02:08:02 PM »

As in C++ templates/metaprogramming, like the STL?

yuppers.. the template code library itself compiles, and libraries that use that library compile and link as well... but I have an executable higher up the tree that uses this library and claims it's "not a template"

Honestly I think my cmake files are just spaghetti. I'm pretty inexperienced in cmake.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 293 294 [295]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic