My brain in Dewey Decimal. 000-999, all subjects, in 6.8 seconds, Hi-Definition with appropriate music. I ran 9000+ of my writings through http://act-dl.base-search.net/textclassifier – checked the results by going back to the source data used for AI training to see if they are, indeed, things that I’ve written a lot about through the years and consider myself knowledgeable in. It matched up, as did the subjects that *didn’t* show up: those are things that I might talk about, but _only_ through the lens of the subjects I *do* know about.
Example: Analytical Logic? Maybe I’ll view it through the lens of Linguistics or Psychology or from an “Other Religions” perspective. And, indeed, this is what I do.
But I won’t talk about Psychology from an Analytical Logic point of view, or it would be very unlikely in any case.
Does this mean something for anybody on the planet but me? I don’t know. But it was important for me to know where my strengths and weaknesses are. Is it scientific? Some may say that “it depends on how good the AI is.” That’s true. I believe it’s good. I checked it against myself (who is both the subject and object of this experiment) and I concur with its results. Is there cognitive bias? Of course: it’s my brain, it’s work I did, so of course I’m going to be biased towards considering it accurate.
But, no glaring errors I can see, and all results are easily verifiable against all source data – not that anybody else out of seven billion people would WANT to verify these results. But it’s possible.
Seeing the gaps in my knowledge (the bottom row – or the right hand side in the sliding 3 panels) – or rather, “these are subjects I do NOT seem to write about” is probably my favorite part.
But most satisfying to me, is I don’t think anybody has done this before.
Maybe someone has. Doesn’t matter. It’s my brain here and something I always wondered about.