this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
106 points (90.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35806 readers
2247 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I know current learning models work a little like neurons but why not just make a sim that works exactly like how we understand neurons work

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] los_chill@programming.dev 20 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Neurons undergo physical change in their interconnectivity. New connections (synapses) are created, strengthened, and lost over time. We don't have circuits that can do that.

[–] Neuromancer49@midwest.social 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Actually, neuron-based machine learning models can handle this. The connections between the fake neurons can be modeled as a "strength", or the probability that activating neuron A leads to activation of neuron B. Advanced learning models just change the strength of these connections. If the probability is zero, that's a "lost" connection.

Those models don't have physical connections between neurons, but mathematical/programmed connections. Those are easy to change.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's a vastly simplified model. Real neurons can't be approximated with a couple of weights - each neuron is at least as complex as a multi-layer RNN.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'd love to know more.

I recently read "The brain is a computer is a brain: neuroscience’s internal debate and the social significance of the Computational Metaphor" and found it compelling. It bristled a lot of feathers on Lemmy, but think their critique is valid.

Do you have any review resources? I have a bit of knowledge around biology and biochemistry, but haven't studied neuroscience.

And no pressure. It's a lot to ask dor some random person on the internet. Cheers!

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Here's the video that introduced me to the idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmtQPrH-gC4

He explains it very well and gives a lot of references :)

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Did OP mean accomplishing the connectivity and with software rather than hardware? No, we don’t have hardware that can modify itself like a brain does, but I think it is possible to accomplish that with coding.

[–] palebluethought@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Sure, but now you're talking about running a physical simulation of neurons. Real neurons aren't just electrical circuits. Not only do they evolve rapidly over time, they're powerfully influenced by their chemical environment, which is controlled by your body's other systems, and so on. These aren't just minor factors, they're central parts of how your brain works.

Yes, in principle, we can (and have, to some extent) run physical simulations of neurons down to the molecular resolution necessary to accomplish this. But the computational power required to do that is massively, like billions of times, more expensive than the "neural networks" we have today, which are really just us anthropomorphizing a bunch of matrix multiplication.

It's simply not feasible to do this at a scale large enough to be useful, even with all the computation on Earth.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Thanks for putting it at a scale I can grok. If we could create such a device it would just be a literal (digital) brain.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Performance suffers. Basically we don't have the computing power to scale the sw to the perf levels of the human brain.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yes we do. FPGAs and memristors can both recreate those effects at the hardware level. The problem is scaling them and their necessary number of interconnections to the number of neurons in the human brain, on top of getting their base wiring and connections close to how our genetics build and wires our base brains.