Marr’s three levels of analysis
PAPER VIII — COMPUTATION · QUESTION 19 OF 32
In plain terms: The free entry where the three questions — what, how, and in what — are kept properly apart.
The question as set
Marr's three levels distinguish the computational, algorithmic, and implementational descriptions of a cognitive system. Apply all three to a single capacity — say, associative recall — and state what is lost if any level is omitted.
The question in Paper VIII · Its section on the reference page
The question in context
This is question 19 of the 32 set in Paper VIII — Computation of The Truly Hardest Exam in the World, the examination of The College of All Minds. In the College’s subject index it is filed under Vision and perception. Like every question of the College, it carries three references of record, verified live at publication and described twice — technically, and in plain terms — so the ground can be judged before it is walked. The response required is an argument, not a survey, of at most three thousand words, as technical as the question demands and no more.
The references of record
The computational theory of mind
Marr's trichotomy in its scholarly home: computational problem, algorithm, and implementation as distinct explananda.
In plain terms: The free entry where the three questions — what, how, and in what — are kept properly apart.
The levels at work across the field — and the losses when one is collapsed into another.
In plain terms: The free survey showing why an explanation missing a level explains less than it seems.
The worked capacity: associative recall as content-addressed retrieval, gradient-descent dynamics, and neural realisation — all three levels on one example.
In plain terms: The free expert page on remembering-by-settling — the single capacity the question asks to be described three ways.
Background: David Marr (neuroscientist) · Level of analysis