Creating the best restaurant experiences through vertically integrated hardware, software and AI.
For more than half a century, materials scientists have struggled with how to simulate the complexity of polymer materials. An individual chain can comprise tens of thousands of atoms, a melt or composite contains billions, and the properties engineers actually care about, such as how an adhesive grips a surface, how a self-assembling block copolymer locks into a nanostructure, or how a biopolymer film stretches without tearing, emerge only over length and time scales that forcible atomistic simulation cannot reach.
The standard workaround is coarse-graining: replacing groups of atoms with simpler mesoscopic particles so the model is fast enough to run. The catch is that this compression almost always sacrifices physics. Conventional coarse-grained polymer models can usually reproduce equilibrium structure or large-scale dynamics, but rarely both, and they routinely fail to capture the entropic and viscous forces that govern how polymers actually flow, relax, and dissipate energy. Those are the forces that dictate mechanical performance, and they are the forces that traditional machine-learning approaches, despite their flexibility, also tend to break.
A research paper recently published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences introduces a new machine-learning framework that lets coarse-grained models achieve both at once. A team from Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pennsylvania has built an AI architecture that learns coarse-grained dynamics directly from data, whether simulated or experimental, while being mathematically incapable of violating the laws of thermodynamics.
Patreon support: / braininspired.
Free Video Series: Open Questions in AI and Neuroscience:
https://braininspired.co/open/
Show notes: https://braininspired.co/podcast/109/
Mark and I discuss a wide range of topics surrounding his Interactivism framework for explaining cognition. Interactivism stems from Mark’s account of representations and how what we represent in our minds is related to the external world — a challenge that has plagued the mind-body problem since the beginning. Basically, representations are anticipated interactions with the world, that can be true (if enacting one helps an organism maintain its thermodynamic relation with the world) or false (if it doesn’t). And representations are functional, in that they function to maintain far from equilibrium thermodynamics for the organism for self-maintenance. Over the years, Mark has filled out Interactivism, starting with a process metaphysics foundation and building from there to account for representations, how our brains might implement representations, and why AI is hindered by our modern \.
Thank you to Google DeepMind for the invite. 🙏
❤️ Check out Lambda here and sign up for their GPU Cloud: https://lambda.ai/papers.
Our Patreon if you wish to support us: / twominutepapers.
🙏 We would like to thank our generous Patreon supporters who make Two Minute Papers possible:
Adam Bridges, Benji Rabhan, B Shang, Cameron Navor, Charles Ian Norman Venn, Christian Ahlin, Eric T, Fred R, Gordon Child, Juan Benet, Michael Tedder, Owen Skarpness, Richard Sundvall, Ryan Stankye, Shawn Becker, Steef, Taras Bobrovytsky, Tazaur Sagenclaw, Tybie Fitzhugh, Ueli Gallizzi.
My research: https://cg.tuwien.ac.at/~zsolnai/
Thumbnail design: https://felicia.hu.
00:00 Intro.
There is a wide gap between current machine learning representations and the way in which our minds represent reality. Our mental representations are dynamic, coherent, unified (in the sense that we establish relationships between all our domains of knowledge, in the context of a global universe), and they are updated on the fly. In this panel, we bring some important thinkers and practitioners of cognitive science, robotics, AI and philosophy together to discuss representations for future generations of AI systems.
This is the first in a series of events on Cognitive Artificial Intelligence. The goal of Cognitive AI is to build and understand systems that can make sense of their environment, combine knowledge and perception, learn to act on domains they have not encountered before, make autonomous decisions and explain them, interact deeply with people and human society.
We are proud to welcome our panelists:
Mark Bickhard: Cognition and Truth Value.
Stephen grossberg: how each brain makes a mind: from brain resonances to conscious experiences.
Yulia Sandamirskaya: Memory, intentionality, and autonomy enabled by neuronal attractor dynamics.
Treating AI as a philosophical project by Joscha Bach.
Why do we find ourselves in a universe that has learnable properties? How is it possible for a symbol to mean something? What is the relationship between observation, perception and knowledge? What is agency? What constitutes a self model?
When we approach Artificial Intelligence as a philosophical project, we gain a fascinating and useful perspective on age-old questions of philosophy.
This short presentation will touch on some of these questions and aims to open up a broader space for discussion.
Our speaker, Joscha Bach, PhD, is a cognitive scientist and AI researcher specializing in computational models of cognition and neuro-symbolic AI.
He has taught and worked in AI research at Humboldt University of Berlin, the Institute for Cognitive Science in Osnabrück, the MIT Media Lab, the Harvard Program for Evolutionary Dynamics.