I agree the progress in this matter is in the order of decades, following Kurzweil and Markram we will have a full working model of the brain in 20 or 10 years; however, what I meant on the comment, is the fact that the Confabulation theory does not explain too much. On one hand, Nielsen claims this is the ultimate theory that explains how cognition works. He shows very interesting outcomes with the simulations but the same results can be obtained with N-order Markov Chains.
I must say I bought his "Confabulation Theory" book, and was quickly lured by the outrageous claims he makes about confabulation being the ultimate explanation on how the cortex works. It's been a few years since the book and I was not able to find not even a single reference about his work since then. By now I would expect he had came up with more simulations and demonstrations prooving his claims on the theory.
@rolandomartin It's difficult enough getting a model of a single brain region or network to be the 'predominant' model of that region or network. Hecht-Neilsen's model is what you'd call a 'global brain theory,' and those are much harder to catch on. I don't think any such global brain theory has ever reached anywhere near universally accepted status. Coupled with the comparatively few people doing computational neuroscience, that's why you haven't seen much new on it. Come back in ten years?
@Aoitetsugakusha Moreover, his claims suggest that by today (four years after this presentation of the theory) we should have fully fledged speech recognizers working on NLP and understanding, aiming to the customer service market (good luck to all the jobs in India) but nothing has been announced or presented.
I am dissapointed. Darmendra Modha claimed he simulated a cat brain. Markram wrote a letter to IBM's CTO claiming the guy was a fraud.
@rolandomartin Well, in truth IBM's Watson is one of the best natural language processors we have, I just don't think it has anything to do with neural networks. So that may not be too far off.
Modha's model was 'to scale' with a cat brain; that doesn't mean it was made to simulate cat behavior though. This is probably what Markram is relying on.
My own lab is working with artificial rat brains, but even our best robot has only the neuromodulatory systems, which is huge but not everything.
@rolandomartin We do plenty of simulations; the lab is still young and we have just a few robots at the moment. The size of the lab is expanding pretty rapidly over the last few months, though I'll be going to a different campus for grad school in the Fall.
You should find it pretty easily if you search 'Cognitive Anteater Robotics Lab' on google. Note: The anteater is the campus mascot, hence the name.
I agree the progress in this matter is in the order of decades, following Kurzweil and Markram we will have a full working model of the brain in 20 or 10 years; however, what I meant on the comment, is the fact that the Confabulation theory does not explain too much. On one hand, Nielsen claims this is the ultimate theory that explains how cognition works. He shows very interesting outcomes with the simulations but the same results can be obtained with N-order Markov Chains.
rolandomartin 11 months ago
Comment removed
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
"Muscles of thought"
That's a weird way to put it...
Some people may confuse that with LITERAL muscles :P
TheReasonWhyGuy 1 year ago
I must say I bought his "Confabulation Theory" book, and was quickly lured by the outrageous claims he makes about confabulation being the ultimate explanation on how the cortex works. It's been a few years since the book and I was not able to find not even a single reference about his work since then. By now I would expect he had came up with more simulations and demonstrations prooving his claims on the theory.
rolandomartin 2 years ago
@rolandomartin It's difficult enough getting a model of a single brain region or network to be the 'predominant' model of that region or network. Hecht-Neilsen's model is what you'd call a 'global brain theory,' and those are much harder to catch on. I don't think any such global brain theory has ever reached anywhere near universally accepted status. Coupled with the comparatively few people doing computational neuroscience, that's why you haven't seen much new on it. Come back in ten years?
Aoitetsugakusha 11 months ago
@Aoitetsugakusha Moreover, his claims suggest that by today (four years after this presentation of the theory) we should have fully fledged speech recognizers working on NLP and understanding, aiming to the customer service market (good luck to all the jobs in India) but nothing has been announced or presented.
I am dissapointed. Darmendra Modha claimed he simulated a cat brain. Markram wrote a letter to IBM's CTO claiming the guy was a fraud.
rolandomartin 11 months ago
@rolandomartin Well, in truth IBM's Watson is one of the best natural language processors we have, I just don't think it has anything to do with neural networks. So that may not be too far off.
Modha's model was 'to scale' with a cat brain; that doesn't mean it was made to simulate cat behavior though. This is probably what Markram is relying on.
My own lab is working with artificial rat brains, but even our best robot has only the neuromodulatory systems, which is huge but not everything.
Aoitetsugakusha 11 months ago
@Aoitetsugakusha Do you carry on computer simulations? Can you elaborate on the robos of your lab?
rolandomartin 7 months ago
@rolandomartin We do plenty of simulations; the lab is still young and we have just a few robots at the moment. The size of the lab is expanding pretty rapidly over the last few months, though I'll be going to a different campus for grad school in the Fall.
You should find it pretty easily if you search 'Cognitive Anteater Robotics Lab' on google. Note: The anteater is the campus mascot, hence the name.
Aoitetsugakusha 7 months ago