我没有使用来自SIVEP,肠绞痛数据在巴西的所有状态的分析,全面分析一个vailable here

In the image above, we can see the gamma mean estimate for the delay on each state in Brazil. Below you can see the distribution for Rio Grande do Sul / RS:



I made an入门谈话在过去的嵌入字,这写了大约词矢量背后的哲学思想的部分的扩展版本。这篇文章的目的是提供一个介绍维特根斯坦的主要思路上是密切相关的是分配(这意味着什么后,我将讨论)技术设计语言学,如word2vec [Mikolov et al., 2013],手套[Pennington等人,2014], Skip-Thought Vectors [Kiros et al., 2015], among others.

One of the most interesting aspects of Wittgenstein is perhaps that fact that he had developed two very different philosophies during his life, and each of which had great influence. Something quite rare for someone who spent so much time working on these ideas and retreating even after the major influence they exerted, especially in the Vienna Circle. A true lesson of intellectual honesty, and in my opinion, one important legacy.

Wittgenstein was an avid reader of the Schopenhauer’s philosophy, and in the same way that Schopenhauer inherited his philosophy from Kant, especially regarding the division of what can be experimented (现象) 或不 (noumena), contrasting things as他们似乎对我们from things因为他们在自己维特根斯坦的结论是叔本华的哲学是基本上是正确的。他认为,在noumena境界,我们没有概念的理解,因此我们将永远不能说任何东西(没有成为废话),而相比之下,现象根据我们的经验,我们确实可以谈,并尝试了解的境界。通过添加安全的基础,如逻辑,对现象世界,他能够推理世界是怎样的按语言描述和可由此映射什么的界限如何以及什么可以在语言或概念的思想表达。

该first main theory of language from Wittgenstein, described in his逻辑哲学论, is known as the “Picture theory of language” (aka Picture theory of meaning). This theory is based on an analogy with painting, where Wittgenstein realized that a painting is something very different than a natural landscape, however, a skilled painter can still represent the real landscape by placing patches or strokes corresponding to the natural landscape reality. Wittgenstein gave the name “logical form” to this set of relationships between the painting and the natural landscape. This logical form, the set of internal relationships common to both representations, is why the painter was able to represent reality because the logical form was the same in both representations (在这里我呼吁双方为“交涉”是一致的与叔本华和康德而言,因为现实对我们来说也是一个代表,它和物自体本身区分).

This theory was important, especially in our context (NLP), because Wittgenstein realized that the same thing happens with language. We are able to assemble words in sentences to match the samelogical form什么样的,我们想描述。逻辑形式是核心思想,使我们能talk about the world。However, later Wittgenstein realized that he had just picked a single task, out of the vast amount of tasks that language can perform and created a whole theory of meaning around it.

事实是,语言可以做很多其他的任务,除了代表(生动描述)的现实。有了语言,维特根斯坦注意到,我们可以发号施令,我们不能说这是东西的图片。不久,他意识到这些反例,维特根斯坦放弃了picture theory of language和一个dopted a much more powerful metaphor of一个工具。这里我们接近th的现代观点e meaning in language as well as the main foundational idea behind many modern Machine Learning techniques for word/sentence representations that works quite well. Once you realize that language works as a tool, if you want to understand the meaning of it, you just need to understand all the possible things you can do with it. And if you take for instance a word or concept in isolation, the meaning of it is the sum of all its uses, and this meaning is fluid and can have many different faces. This important thought can be summarized in the well-known quote below:

该meaning of a word is itsusein the language.


人们无法猜测有一个词功能。一个人必须看它的使用,以及learn from that

- 维特根斯坦,哲学研究



- 维特根斯坦,哲学研究

约翰·弗斯was a linguist also known for the popularization of this context-dependent nature of the meaning who also used Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations as a recourse to emphasize the importance of the context in meaning, in which I quote below:

文本作为构成的情况下有助于的上下文含义的语句,因为情况配售被设置为识别使用。正如维特根斯坦说,“该meaning of words lies in their use。’ (Phil. Investigations, 80, 109). The day-to-day practice of playing language games recognizes customs and rules. It follows that a text in such established usage may contain sentences such as ‘Don’t be such an ass !’, ‘You silly ass !’, ‘What an ass he is !’ In these examples, the word ass is in familiar and habitual company, commonly collocated with you silly-, he is a silly-, don’t be such an-.You shall know a word by the company it keeps !一屁股的含义是其惯常搭配与这样换句话说上文引述。虽然维特根斯坦正在处理另一个问题,he also recognizes the plain face-value, the physiognomy of words. They look at us !“这句话是由词,这是足够的”。

– John R. Firth

通过它使公司学习单词的含义的这种想法是什么word2vec(and other count-based methods based on co-occurrence as well) is doing by means of data and learning on an unsupervised fashion with a supervised task that was by design built to predict context (or vice-versa, depending if you use skip-gram or cbow), which was also a source of inspiration for theSkip-Thought Vectors。现在,这个想法也被称为“Distributional Hypothesis“,其也被上比语言学等领域。

现在,它是相当惊人的,如果我们看一下在工作Neelakantan, et al., 2015, called “在向量空间每个字多曲面嵌入的有效的非参数估计“, where they mention about an important deficiency in word2vec in which each word type has only one vector representation, you’ll see that this has deep philosophical motivations if we relate it to the Wittgenstein and Firth ideas, because, as Wittgenstein noticed, the meaning of a word is unlikely to wear a single face and word2vec seems to be converging to an approximation of the average meaning of a word instead of capturing the polysemy inherent in language.

一个具体的例子是多方面的words can be seen in the example of the word “evidence”, where the meaning can be quite different to a historian, a lawyer and a physicist. The hearsay cannot count as evidence in a court while it is many times the only evidence that a historian has, whereas the hearsay doesn’t even arise in physics. Recent works such as ELMo [Peters, Matthew E. et al. 2018], which used different levels of features from a LSTM trained with a language model objective are also a very interesting direction with excellent results towards incorporating a context-dependent semantics into the word representations and breaking the tradition of shallow representations as seen in word2vec.



- 基督教S. Perone

Cite this article as: Christian S. Perone, "NLP word representations and the Wittgenstein philosophy of language," in亚洲金博宝未知领域, 23/05/2018,//






Neelakantan, Arvind et al. Efficient Non-parametric Estimation of Multiple Embeddings per Word in Vector Space. 2015.


该same old historicism, now on AI



Perhaps you already read about theTechnological Singularity, since it is one of the hottest predictions for the future (there is even a university with that name), especially after the past years’ development of AI, more precisely, after recent Deep Learning advancements that attracted a lot of attention (and bad journalism too). In his该Singularity is near(2005年)一书,光芒Kurzweil预言,人类将超越“我们的生物的身体和大脑的局限”,还指出“未来的机器将成为人类,即使他们不是生物。”在其他的书籍,像该一个ge of Intelligent Machines(1990年),他还预测了新的世界政府,通过图灵测试,指数规律无处不在的电脑,依此类推(亚洲金博宝并不难有预测正确的量的好召回率是多少?).

一个s science fiction, these predictions are pretty amazing, and many of them were very close to what happened in our “modern days” (and I also really love the works made by Arthur C. Clarke), however, there are a lot of people that are putting science clothes on what is called “futurism”, sometimes also called “future studies” or “futurology”, although as you can imagine, the last term is usually avoided due to some obvious reasons (sounds like astrology, and you don’t want to be linked to pseudo-science right ?).

In this post, I would like to talknot一个bout the predictions. Personally, I think that these points of view are really relevant to our future, just like the serious research on ethics and moral in AI, but I would like to criticize a very particular aspect of the status of how these ideas are being diffused, and I like to make the point here very clear: I’m NOT criticizing the predictions themselves, NEITHER the importance of these predictions and different views of the future, but这些思想的地位,因为它似乎有一种历史主义的这一特定领域的一大翻盘,我想讨论。

有一个very subtle line on where it is very easy to transit from a personal prediction of historical events to a view where you pretend that these predictions have a scientific status. Some harsh critics were made in the past regarding the Technological Singularity, such as this one from Steven Pinker (2008):

(...)没有丝毫的理由相信在未来的奇点。你能想象你想象中的未来事实并非证据表明,它可能甚至是不可能的。看半球形的城市,喷气包通勤,水下城市,英里高的建筑,以及核动力汽车,所有未来的幻想时,我是从未到达一个孩子的主食。纯粹的处理能力是不是仙尘奇迹般地解决了所有的问题。(...) -

– Steven Pinker, 2008

史蒂芬·平克在这里批评的一个重要方面,这是显而易见的,但很多人往往不理解这个含义:事实上,你可以想像的东西,不是一个理由或者证据表明这是可能的。就像Øntological argumentwas criticized in the past by Immanuel Kant, where we have the same kind of transition.

Karl Popper

不过,我想在这里批评的是,很多未来学家都postulating这些预言,就好像他们有一个科学的地位,这是科学方法的严重误解,导致了社会历史观的过去发展的事实,以及由哲学家几乎没有批评Karl Popperin many different important works such as开放社会及其敌人(1945) and on该Poverty of Historicism(1936) in the political context.

该历史主义, as Popper describes, is characterized by the belief that once you have discovered the developmental laws (like the futurist exponential laws) of the history (or AI development), that would enable us to prophesy the destiny of man with a scientific status. Karl Popper found that the dangerous habit of historical prophecy, so widespread among our intellectual leaders, has various functions:

“It is always flattering to belong to the inner circle of the initiated, and to possess the unusual power of predicting the course of history. Besides, there is a tradition that intellectual leaders are gifted with such powers, and not to possess them may lead to the loss of caste. The danger, on the other hand, of their being unmasked as charlatans is very small, since they can always point out that it is certainly permissible to make less sweeping predictions; and the boundaries between these and augury are fluid.”

- 卡尔·波普尔,1945年

Recently, we were also able to witness the伊隆·马斯克和马克·扎克伯格之间的辩论, where you’ll find all sort of criticism between each other, but little or no humility regarding the limits of these claims. Karl Popper mentions an important fact to consider in his The Open Society and Its Enemies book on the social context, that can also be certainly applied here as you’ll note:


- 卡尔·波普尔,1945年


I would like to close this post quoting Karl Popper:

systematic分析历史主义目标某物喜欢科学status.Thisbooknot.许多的该Øpinions表达是个人的。WhatitØwes科学methodis很大程度上一个wareness ofits限制it才不是提供样张哪里nothing能够proved,norit假装科学哪里it能够notgivemore的个人观点view.Itnottry to replace理念的旧系统通过一个系统。它确实nottry to一个dd所有该se volumes filled with智慧,形而上学历史命运,这样是时尚一个blenowadays.Itrather试图表明,这种预言的智慧is有害,that the metaphysics of historyimpede该一个pplication of the piecemeal methods of science to the problems of social reform. And it进一步尝试show怎么样wemay是CØmemakersØur命运when wehave休产ŤØpose作为它的先知。

Cite this article as: Christian S. Perone, "The same old historicism, now on AI," in亚洲金博宝未知领域,30/07/2017,//

Darwin on the track


WHILE watching the finale of the Formula One grand-prix season on television last weekend, your correspondent could not help thinking how Darwinian motor racing has become. Each year, the FIA, the international motor sport’s governing body, sets new design rules in a bid to slow the cars down, so as to increase the amount of overtaking during a race—and thereby make the event more interesting to spectators and television viewers alike. The aim, of course, is to keep the admission and television fees rolling in. Over the course of a season, Formula One racing attracts a bigger audience around the world than any other sport.

Read the这里全文



进化计算(EC) has been widely used in recent years, and every year there are new applications for the techniques developed, despite being a relatively new area, few people are giving attention to that (at least in my vision and I will explain why) probably will have a promising and revolutionary future in relation to how we can generate innovation and even learn from it, especially as it relates toEvolutionary Algorithms(EAS)。


Computação Evolutiva

一个Computação Evolutiva(EC)TEM SIDO SIDO MUITO utilizada号últimosANOS,例如一个CADA ANO阙帕萨,surgem新星aplicações对作为TÉCNICASdesenvolvidas;apesar德SER UMA区域relativamente新星,pouca GENTE ESTA丹多一个devidaatençãoAO阙(AO menos呐明哈visão,电子VOU explicar porque)provavelmente TERA嗯FUTURO promissorËrevolucionárioEMrelaçãoà科莫podemos基拉一inovação一个吃mesmo aprender COM ELA,principalmente无阙本身relaciona COM一个lgoritmos Evolutivos(EAS)。