User:Cristinac/Cqrrelations: Difference between revisions

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[[User:Cristinac/Day1 | Day 1]]
The Nearest Neighbours inherit from their Gold1000 Parent
The Nearest Neighbours inherit from their Gold1000 Parent



Revision as of 16:20, 19 January 2015

Day 1

The Nearest Neighbours inherit from their Gold1000 Parent

10.1.10.1 cqrrelations

Gold 1000 dictionaries

The neural processes of language
Or: why we have a free mind.
Kim Wende


causality-freewill.net

meaningful semantic information in the brain. causality=cement of the universe Axiom: the force is everywhere heteromodal association cortex

Why language/ why the semantic network? free thought ability to create new and meaningful abstract information ex 1: talking in sleep; ex 2: schizophrenia

while we are saying something at the same time we are generating the reason to do so putting energy into word production

language makes us subjective individuals lateralisation cerebellar hemispheric dominance varies between individuals what is semantic memory? continuous “reason production” = verbal fluency the task: 3 conditions: on screen one single word (cue word) then 3 different fluency tasks, semantic associations

what is verbal/conceptual memory? active when you hear language too words that have a meaning=semantic retrieval,

hyper association metacognition: when we reflect we can access concepts, flex them and reassociate them we should look for free will in neuroscience when we generate explicitly meaning association we put more effort in image retrieving retrieving meaning about relations=causality concept of causality in semantic theory=relatedness, meaningful relations

the germans have 2 words for it: reflection and elaboration (nachdenken)



(Des)Anonymisation Technique
Hans Lammerant


denial of service data protection: when is data personal or not? Libre text: any information related to an identified or identifiable person technical means which can be reasonably used to changing non personal data to personal data combining several data sets: can become a problem not an easy thing to analyze, to make sure it isn’t personal data in legal terms research claiming to be able to identify people based on age gender and based on that research: how to anonymise, are you able to infer data about a person? not all personal data has to be by definition private add noise to be able to maintain anonymity and disguise randomization techniques, adding mistakes group people by generalizations: a minimum number prevents people from being identified