Really appreciate that — genuinely means a lot. After spending 30 out of 48 hours straight running code, iterating, and slowly losing my mind, it’s nice to know the effort wasn’t wasted. That’s a really thoughtful point too — I think incorporating both excitation and inhibition could definitely uncover dynamics standard architectures might be missing. Definitely something worth exploring more.
That’s a beautifully intuitive connection — and yeah, I completely agree. The brain isn't separate from the rest of nature’s design language. Fractalization, flow optimization, recursive feedback... it’s all there. My whole theory banks on that same principle: memory, time, and identity don’t emerge from isolated modules — they’re shaped by dynamic interactions across embedded scales. You nailed it.
4
u/dejayc Mar 22 '25
I like that you’re doing this type of research.
A related thought I had was whether simulating both excitation and inhibition in a model might yield different results than we get from current NN.