## [RT][WIP] The Library Unpublished, Chapter 2

* Author: u/None *
* URL: http://archiveofourown.org/works/11539230/chapters/26405676
* Score: 14

* Created: 2017-08-06T10:04:19

### Post:

[Link to content](http://archiveofourown.org/works/11539230/chapters/26405676)

### Comments:

> **u/rhaps0dy4** [+3]  (11 hours later)
> 
> Good chapter! Also, I hadn't understood from the previous chapter that the mystery author was writing novels in the real world that appeared in other fictional works; although it was said. Bad reading comprehension.
> 
> I take an issue with "neural networks can basically do anything", though. As `cio_ci` says, they can't as of yet write a connected story :)

>> **u/None** [+3]  (11 hours later)
>> 
>> Thank you :)
>> 
>> Regarding the neural networks, I did my research (for once), mostly by talking to a few CS students, though none of them were experts in neural networks specifically. If I understood them correctly, a neural network can theoretically solve a lot of problems (including writing a book) by applying what is basically pattern recognition. It's just not practically possible, mostly because a story is a very intricate and interconnected thing. The amounts of both training data and computing power required would be absurd. This is what Cio meant when she said "basically"; as a matter of theory, it's possible. Cio is studying mathematics, not computer science, which might explain her focus on the theoretical.
>> 
>> If there's anything factually wrong with what I said, please tell me. And if you still want to take issue, may I suggest blaming Cio's incomplete knowledge? While she's more tech-savvy than Mike, she's not really an expert :)

>>> **u/rhaps0dy4** [+3]  (12 hours later)
>>> 
>>> Well, theoretically, as the number of hidden neurons approaches infinite; a single-layer neural network can approximate any bounded function. And yes, one of those bounded functions is the map from a 100-dimensional vector to a story; but there are many practical obstacles to learning this mapping. There are fancier architectures that can do more things, but still.
>>> 
>>> Maybe you should say "theoretically" instead of "basically". I'm not a native English speaker so my experience of the word "basically" may not be common let alone universal; but it evokes in me that the concept is a simplification, yet still true in ordinary circumstances.

>>>> **u/None** [+3]  (12 hours later)
>>>> 
>>>> Edited. Thanks for the information as well as your opinion, much appreciated.
>>>> 
>>>> And for the record, I'm not a native English speaker, either. I always have to watch out for wonky word choices/grammatical constructs, which makes feedback like yours even more valuable :)

---