Do you have any grounds for thinking human cognition uses pseudolikelihood? One of the reason Eliezer’s contributions to the site are so strong are because he regularly had research to back up his articles, instead of relying solely on his intuition. I am assuming you are relying on intuition anyway, since you don’t state what grounds you have for privileging this hypothesis.
OK, you’re right that I have way too little evidence to single out this hypothesis. I think it jumped into my head because I had read about pseudolikelihood estimates recently.
In particular, even if we use some form of approximate inference, there’s so many options out there (and probably none of them are good enough to be what humans actually use) that pseudolikelihood is not itself that likely.
Other versions of approximate inference: Markov-Chain Monte Carlo, Variational Inference, Loopy Belief Propogation.
Although merely citing research to back up your claims doesn’t, in my opinion, make your arguments significantly stronger unless the research itself has been established fairly rigorously; for instance, the affect heuristic, while a popular theme on LessWrong, lacks experimental evidence.
Do you have any grounds for thinking human cognition uses pseudolikelihood? One of the reason Eliezer’s contributions to the site are so strong are because he regularly had research to back up his articles, instead of relying solely on his intuition. I am assuming you are relying on intuition anyway, since you don’t state what grounds you have for privileging this hypothesis.
OK, you’re right that I have way too little evidence to single out this hypothesis. I think it jumped into my head because I had read about pseudolikelihood estimates recently.
In particular, even if we use some form of approximate inference, there’s so many options out there (and probably none of them are good enough to be what humans actually use) that pseudolikelihood is not itself that likely.
Other versions of approximate inference: Markov-Chain Monte Carlo, Variational Inference, Loopy Belief Propogation.
Although merely citing research to back up your claims doesn’t, in my opinion, make your arguments significantly stronger unless the research itself has been established fairly rigorously; for instance, the affect heuristic, while a popular theme on LessWrong, lacks experimental evidence.