From the Wikipedia article on Occam's razor:

Another contentious aspect of the razor is that a theory can become more complex in terms of its structure (or syntax), while its ontology (or semantics) becomes simpler, or vice versa. Quine, in a discussion on definition, referred to these two perspectives as "economy of practical expression" and "economy in grammar and vocabulary", respectively.

Within AI, are there some examples that can help understand where the above occurs or where this may be of importance?

I have tried to form a possible example:

Suppose an AI software program has a high cyclomatic complexity. This would mean it has high syntactical complexity (is this correct?). Further, suppose the program operates at a high abstraction level then its semantic complexity could be low (again, is this correct?).

  • $\begingroup$ I think (i might be wrong), one example of the vice versa would be a classifier which says (if class 1 -> output +1, else -> output -1). A pretty simple structure, but the logic is probably very difficult. $\endgroup$ – user9947 Sep 19 '20 at 16:06
  • $\begingroup$ @DuttaA if the method to derive the logic has high complexity this could be an example. $\endgroup$ – Single Malt Sep 19 '20 at 16:23
  • $\begingroup$ A deep learner to detect a specific set of objects (for object detection). Complex structure, simple ontology. $\endgroup$ – OmG Sep 20 '20 at 14:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.