I’ve kind of wanted to write about the concept-as-regularity thing for a while, but it seems akrasia is getting the best of me. Here’s a compressed block of my thoughts on the issue.
Concept-as-regularity ought to be formalized. It is possible to conclude that a concept makes sense under certain circumstances involving other existing concepts that are correlated with no apparent determining factor. Since a Y-delta transformation on a Bayesian network looks like CAR, I’m guessing that the required number of mutually correlated concepts is three. Formalizing CAR would allow us to “formally” define lots of concepts, hopefully all of them. Bleggs and rubes are a perfect example of what CAR is useful for.
OK now I see what a Y-Delta transform is, but I doubt that anything that simple is the key to a rigorous definition of “concept as regularity”. Better, see the paper “The discovery of structural form” By Charles Kemp and Joshua B. Tenenbaum.
I didn’t think it was the electrical engineering trick of turning a star-connected load into a triangle-connected one, but on further reflection, we are talking about a network...
I’ve kind of wanted to write about the concept-as-regularity thing for a while, but it seems akrasia is getting the best of me. Here’s a compressed block of my thoughts on the issue.
Concept-as-regularity ought to be formalized. It is possible to conclude that a concept makes sense under certain circumstances involving other existing concepts that are correlated with no apparent determining factor. Since a Y-delta transformation on a Bayesian network looks like CAR, I’m guessing that the required number of mutually correlated concepts is three. Formalizing CAR would allow us to “formally” define lots of concepts, hopefully all of them. Bleggs and rubes are a perfect example of what CAR is useful for.
OK now I see what a Y-Delta transform is, but I doubt that anything that simple is the key to a rigorous definition of “concept as regularity”. Better, see the paper “The discovery of structural form” By Charles Kemp and Joshua B. Tenenbaum.
what’s a Y-delta transformation ?
I [no longer] believe it’s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang-Baxter_equation).
Whilst it would be intellectually pleasing if this were the concept that Warrigal is referencing, I doubt it.
I didn’t think it was the electrical engineering trick of turning a star-connected load into a triangle-connected one, but on further reflection, we are talking about a network...
The electrical engineering trick was several decades before Yang and Baxter and has its own wikipedia entry.