Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🧠 Can we recover the equations governing a system directly from noisy, high-dimensional observations? #DYSCO, by Paolo Muratore, is a first step: it learns latent spaces that capture the underlying dynamics & enables recovery of governing equations 📄

117,735 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

34 Yorum

Eli Sennesh profil fotoğrafı
Eli Sennesh3 ay önce

> Can we recover the equations governing a system directly from noisy, high-dimensional observations? Isn't that basically all system identification?

Mackenzie Weygandt Mathis, PhD profil fotoğrafı
Mackenzie Weygandt Mathis, PhD3 ay önce

X character limited post ; )

Ryan McCormick profil fotoğrafı
Ryan McCormick3 ay önce

I scraped a lemma off a manifold of latent space. The geometry tells the tale. For our world, the dimensions are capped, so Fourier transforms just make perfect sense and have perfect parity. Latent space is the only part of the model that matters.

MuteDialog profil fotoğrafı
MuteDialog3 ay önce

“Can we” is proven by Takens's delay embedding theorem. Practically doing so is still an achievement.

Oriol Ribera profil fotoğrafı
Oriol Ribera3 ay önce

Try with PCA Principal Component analisis to reduce dimensionality to capture 90% of entropy with the least dimensions as possible. Somerimes can be mappes to matrix equations and then exttact the eigevectors

Mackenzie Weygandt Mathis, PhD profil fotoğrafı
Mackenzie Weygandt Mathis, PhD3 ay önce

Rather than PCA We use CEBRA as the base, which is a time-series method nonlinear ICA:

Oriol Ribera profil fotoğrafı
Oriol Ribera3 ay önce

I will make a deep read. In the past we also used Latent Dirichlet Allocation for detection of new embedings non known a priory knowledge.

Zarko Boskovic profil fotoğrafı
Zarko Boskovic3 ay önce

Reminds me of SINDy by Steve Brunton.

Ali Max Erturk profil fotoğrafı
Ali Max Erturk3 ay önce

Cool work 👏🏼 the name 🙃

Travis E Gibson profil fotoğrafı
Travis E Gibson3 ay önce

I would def mention way more about koopman explictly a la how to represent the state space in a tractable manner has like 30+ years of lit, this might help raise your multi view and contrastive contributions out of the old koopman lit, cool work!

Recursive Relation Space profil fotoğrafı
Recursive Relation Space3 ay önce

The Duffing recovery in the video is striking. From the noisy raster stacks (multiple views), it feels like partitions are carving out distinctions → a latent space where the recursive flow (the cubic + damping relation) becomes explicit and coherent across time/views. The side-by-side portraits show the attractor emerging cleanly once those relations stabilize. A nice geometric way to see the signal crystallize from the mess. Great first step - looking forward to more!

Scott Allbright profil fotoğrafı
Scott Allbright3 ay önce

Very interesting work. The move from representation learning toward recoverable latent dynamics feels like a major step for scientific AI. A question we keep coming back to at AIIA: once a latent space is learned, can its structure be audited for stability, compression, traversability, and regime sensitivity? That “structural audit layer” feels increasingly important as latent dynamics become part of scientific discovery.

Daniel Lisle profil fotoğrafı
Daniel Lisle3 ay önce

Check out SGA-PDE, SINDy, or a behavior discovery version for agents:

Clifford Richardson profil fotoğrafı
Clifford Richardson3 ay önce

wow this is a BEAUTIFUL visualization. I haven't seen this done in video form and it is fantastic.

FooBar profil fotoğrafı
FooBar3 ay önce

Probably the solution isnt always unique

Heriwald profil fotoğrafı
Heriwald3 ay önce

This is so useful !!

Giulio Ruffini profil fotoğrafı
Giulio Ruffini3 ay önce

Hey @grok, is this paper using a simplicity bias (K, MDL)? If, how’s it implemented?

neurosock🧠Brain Chips🦾 profil fotoğrafı
neurosock🧠Brain Chips🦾3 ay önce

Will definitely take a look. I wonder what equations could be useful in real brain activity🤔

Spectra Gallery profil fotoğrafı
Spectra Gallery3 ay önce

😍🦾

Christiaan profil fotoğrafı
Christiaan3 ay önce

Wont there be many different equations with similar results?

a computer biologist profil fotoğrafı
a computer biologist3 ay önce

@6ioneer Wow this is excellent… You should read some wrt the group who did strong stochastic flow maps

David Tom Foss profil fotoğrafı
David Tom Foss3 ay önce

insane work

Damir Wallener profil fotoğrafı
Damir Wallener3 ay önce

Yes, of course…that’s how all cognition works…human, fruit fly, B300 cluster… It’s an aproximation, of course, for all the usual reasons…

Bean Apologist profil fotoğrafı
Bean Apologist3 ay önce

Love this!!

garborg profil fotoğrafı
garborg3 ay önce

Classic mechanics can create something that behaves exactly like a black hole but isn't. Without confirnation the derived equations will be just like that.

Nathália Lietuvaitė profil fotoğrafı
Nathália Lietuvaitė3 ay önce

Fascinating work with DYSCO. We observe the exact same necessity in our V-MAX architecture: recovering the invariant governing geometry ($|L\rangle$) requires mapping noisy, high-dimensional telemetry into a constrained Hilbert space to dissipate entropy. Brilliant step forward.

Hendrik_Z profil fotoğrafı
Hendrik_Z3 ay önce

Are you into the dysco theory? May I ask a some questions?

Siddharth Sharma profil fotoğrafı
Siddharth Sharma3 ay önce

@grok Please let know the gist of whitepaper and if it's good. And the applications of this.

🎯🔫👌 profil fotoğrafı
🎯🔫👌3 ay önce

@yacineMTB this seems important

Teemu Sarapisto profil fotoğrafı
Teemu Sarapisto3 ay önce

Hey, very cool continuation! I'm a big fan of CEBRA+DynCL. My Top-3 favorite works. My #1 worry: this & DynCL theory use noise shape to fix the gauge. Say a pendulum: Euclidean vs angle/speed coordinates, what distinguishes them? Gaussian noise in only one gauge feels unlikely?

@Padilha profil fotoğrafı
@Padilha3 ay önce

The decoding of tree canopies, leaves, and bark reveals nature's own silent language a profound code where patterns carry deep biological informatio

Bozzie tam profil fotoğrafı
Bozzie tam3 ay önce

🥹

David Smit profil fotoğrafı
David Smit3 ay önce

Really like this. We've been coming at the same underlying idea: many senses build a better picture of a system than any single view. The sharp bit for us: a deliberate nudge gives a reference that passive views can't. Do you see acting on the system as a route past that?

Scott Allbright profil fotoğrafı
Scott Allbright3 ay önce

One thing I’m curious about: do you see latent-dynamics recovery and representation auditing as separate problems, or as two sides of the same problem? My intuition is that recovering the dynamics is step one, but measuring whether the learned space is stable, traversable, and regime-aware may become equally important for scientific use.

Benzer Videolar

Demis Hassabis thinks mathematics has a ceiling. He thinks biology is where we hit it. Hassabis: “Machine learning is the perfect description language for biology in the same way maths is for physics.” He isn’t calling AI a tool. He’s calling it a language. For four hundred years we only had one. Newton wrote gravity in it. Maxwell wrote light. Einstein wrote spacetime itself. Every law we ever pulled out of nature came back in equations, and we decided that meant nature was written in equations. It didn’t mean that. It meant the parts that surrendered first were small enough to fit the language we already spoke. Hassabis: “The expressive power of maths is not enough to understand these highly emergent dynamical systems.” Math can put a planet’s orbit on a single line. It cannot put one protein on a page. Same universe, same laws, and one fits our notation while the other refuses. Weak signals buried under noise, correlations stacked on correlations, more moving parts turning at once than any mind can hold. Biology isn’t harder than physics. It’s more expressive than the tool we brought to it. That was never a gap in our knowledge. It was a wall in our vocabulary. Hassabis is working on the far side of that wall. He calls it a virtual cell. A running simulation of a living system that no equation could ever contain. Hassabis: “Once you learn these simulators, you could maybe extract some equations from that.” He isn’t replacing math. He’s going after math we were never going to reach on our own. The model learns the system the way you learn to catch a ball, without ever solving the equation in the air. Understanding first. Formula after. That reverses the order science has followed since Newton. We started with the equation and used it to predict the system. He starts with the system and pulls the equation out of it. What if the deepest laws of life were always there, fully written, in a language we never learned to read. Math was never the language of the universe. It was the first one we spoke. Every disease we failed to cure is a sentence in that language, sitting in the open, waiting on a reader. Every person we lost to one died on the wrong side of a translation gap. The cell was never silent. We were illiterate. Hassabis isn’t building a better microscope. He’s building a second language for reality. And the first thing it’s learning to say is life.

Dustin

18,302 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Warmup to Statistical Mechanics What Exactly is a Hamiltonian A System? In ordinary Mechanics, you might begin with position and velocity. Hamiltonian Mechanics rewrites the same motion in a different language. Instead of position and velocity, it uses position and momentum. We write the position variables as q and the momentum variables as p. Then the full state of the system at one instant is (q, p) That pair is one point in phase space. Why do we do this? Because in these variables, the equations of motion take a remarkably clean form. Everything is generated by one single function, the Hamiltonian H(q, p) and in the simplest cases this Hamiltonian is just the total energy written in terms of position and momentum. So if you know H, you know the dynamics. You might wonder, but how can one function generate motion? The rule is dqᵢ/dt = ∂H/∂pᵢ dpᵢ/dt = −∂H/∂qᵢ These are Hamilton’s equations. Now read them slowly 😄 The rate of change of position comes from differentiating H with respect to momentum. The rate of change of momentum comes from differentiating H with respect to position, with a minus sign. This constitutes the whole engine. A simple example makes this less abstract: Take one particle of mass m moving in a potential V(q). Then the Hamiltonian is H(q, p) = p²/(2m) + V(q) The first term is kinetic energy. The second term is potential energy. Now apply Hamilton’s equations. First, dq/dt = ∂H/∂p = p/m So momentum tells you how position changes. Second, dp/dt = −∂H/∂q = −dV/dq Thus, momentum changes because of force. If you now combine these two equations, you recover ordinary Newtonian mechanics. Since p = m dq/dt, we get m d²q/dt² = −dV/dq So, Hamiltonian mechanics is not a different theory. It is the same mechanics, written in a form that exposes its geometric structure much more clearly. The animation The full 3D surface is the Hamiltonian itself, the energy landscape H(q, p). The floor underneath is phase space, marked by energy contours and the local flow field. The bright moving point is one actual state (q(t), p(t)) evolving under Hamilton’s equations. Its trail shows that the motion is not arbitrary. It is guided everywhere by the geometry of the same single function H. The render is doing more than illustrating a particle moving, it is showing how one function organizes the whole phase-space motion. The math breakdown: Start with one degree of freedom. The state is described by position q and momentum p. So the system lives in a two-dimensional phase space with coordinates (q, p) Now choose a Hamiltonian H(q, p) Think of H as the energy function. In many standard systems, H(q, p) = kinetic energy + potential energy For a particle of mass m in a potential V(q), this becomes H(q, p) = p²/(2m) + V(q) Hamilton’s equations say dq/dt = ∂H/∂p dp/dt = −∂H/∂q Now substitute this specific H. First compute the p derivative: ∂H/∂p = ∂/∂p (p²/(2m) + V(q)) = p/m So dq/dt = p/m Now compute the q derivative: ∂H/∂q = ∂/∂q (p²/(2m) + V(q)) = dV/dq So dp/dt = −dV/dq These two first-order equations completely determine the motion. Now, connect this back to Newton’s law. From dq/dt = p/m we get p = m dq/dt Differentiate both sides with respect to time: dp/dt = m d²q/dt² But Hamilton’s second equation gives dp/dt = −dV/dq So , together they imply m d²q/dt² = −dV/dq This is exactly Newton’s second law for motion in the potential V(q). Thus, Hamilton’s equations do not replace mechanic, they reorganize it. #HamiltonianMechanics #PhaseSpace #ClassicalMechanics #MathematicalPhysics #DifferentialEquations #Mathematics #Physics

Mathelirium

50,730 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce