Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Working on Brain-Rivaling Computer

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the will-it-get-bored-too dept.

Obdurate writes "The first supercomputers to approach and even surpass the processing power of the human brain are to be built by IBM, under a $184M contract announced by the US Government yesterday. ASCI Purple and Blue Gene/L will be the fastest and most powerful machines built, with a combined capacity equal to the 500 best of todays computers."

27 of 560 comments (clear)

  1. uhu by ronaldcromwell · · Score: 5, Interesting

    how do they measure the processing power of the human brain?

    1. Re:uhu by Planesdragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      yeah. like calculating the precise angle and velocity to jump in order to avoid a phaser shot that was just fired. Damn but if I could move faster than the speed of light as well as Mr Shatner did (regularly) on Star Trek...

      Not quite...

      A phaser's energy pulse doesn't travel at c--if it did, we'd never see even a little streak in any scale small enough to see the crew or the enterprise. The directed-energy weapon has at least some mass to contain the energy.

      And even if the phasers did move at c, to dodge one you don't need to get out of the way of the ray--you need to get out of the way of the person pointing it. It's much easier to dodge reaction time than the speed of light. ;)

      It's also probably simpler for a brain to calc. the likely target of the phaser, and then NOT to be there, than to try and find the optimum hiding place. Act first, and think in the half-second while your body is going "wow, we're not dead!"

    2. Re:uhu by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, you're incorrect here. According to The Next Generation Technical Manual, phaser blasts travel at c, or the speed of light, as a phaser is a directed energy weapon. This corresponds quite nicely to our more mundane LASER, which is a beam of collimated light energy composed of photons. Photons (the particles, not the torpedos) are massless particles that always travel at the speed of light. Beams of energy need not have mass in order to do what they do, but if you ask Einstein, mass and energy are related so the point is somewhat nebulous.

      As you see, it would be impossible for our dear captain to dodge a phaser blast, for to do so he would have to be moving faster than c. I doubt Kirk has a personal warp drive in his back pocket, so this just isn't possible. But if he can't dodge the blast, he'd be dead, and in the words of Phil Farrand of The Nitpicker's Guide, "it'd be a really short show".

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  2. not too far away... by mirko · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We will have such chips implanted into our brains in order to reason even quicker, then we will develop newer chip that will help design newer computers that will miniaturize themselves as new implants that will help us...
    etc.
    How far are we from learning kung fu from an optical disk ? :)

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  3. Computing for it's own sake? by Mulletproof · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is it just me or doesn't the governement already have enough ultra-mega computers built for them? I mean, what do they do with the old 1.4 terrabit systems? Use them as Unreal 2003 servers?

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  4. re processing power of the human brain by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This is like trying to compare apples and oranges, or rather, apples and trees.

    The human brain does more than simple processing. Think about it, the ability to do calculations, etc., is tied into the most ancient (reptilian) part of the brain.

    Now, if they could make a computer that could experience emotions (or could explain what women really want :-)), that would be a true accomplishment.

    1. Re:re processing power of the human brain by RealityProphet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think they are taking that into consideration. The ability to do calculations is a very high level function (how many dogs can do it?), and we know computers can do that a LOT faster than us (when was the last time you multiplied a billion numbers in a second?). Its all the autonomous functions of the brain (i.e. vision and speech processing, etc) that contribute to our amazing computation abilities.

    2. Re:re processing power of the human brain by anichan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While it's true that the ability of our brain to control hundreds of muscles as well as it does is important, the thing that our brains do the best is pattern matching. It's how we can hear many different people talking and ignore the differences in the way they say 'potato', for instance, to figure out what he or she is saying. It is rather difficult to get a computer to emulate that sort of thing.

      --

      karma is for the weak >)

  5. Something doesn't jive by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I heard ( A sciam article I think ) that all the computers in existance put together equal approximately the processing power of a mouse brain.

    --

    Eat at Joe's.

  6. Re:Fast, Yes by Scarblac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are we talking about the brain as we use it, or the brain, at it's full potential?

    They're the same thing. The brain used the way we use it is the brain.

    The idea of a brain that could do a lot more than we ever used it for, by very simple means, is an evolutionary impossibility - it could never have evolved. The idea is absurd.

    --
    I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
  7. SPEC-brain exists and it's almost what you think.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Truth is stranger than fiction.

    SPEC brain scans are actually quite commonly usely used to understand brain activity. Here's a study that shows how it's used:

    http://neuro-www.mgh.harvard.edu/forum_2/ADHDF/I nf oMarijuanaUse-ADHD-DrS.html

  8. 12544 Power5 processors? Damn! by mfago · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anyone else notice that? Power4 is the current generation, and holds the 9th spot on the top-500 list with only 1280 processors!

    I'm sure IBM is working hard on a new interconnect for this beast. Anyone know about the next-generation SP switch?

    The press release also mentions that Purple will consist of "196 seperate computers" -- which works out to 64-processors per computer. Way to go IBM: the current Power4 systems are only to 32-way!

  9. Probably not a coincidence.... by EmagGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that this contract is made public right after we get our doors blown off by a japanese supercomputer in the top 500....

  10. the science of inteligence by visionsofmcskill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    its called the child playing wall ball syndome

    Although the "rated" processor cycle of a human brain may be measured in Hz... the overall number-crunching and algorithm pattern matching power of 4 billion years of refinement utterly out-class any computer well be making for years to come.

    Case in point.. A child playing wall ball makes more physics calculations in one minute of game than a whole team of physicists could map out in months.... he calculates his own mass, his own speed, the angles and exact acceleration of his arms, the weight and distribution of balence between his feet, all while tracking the movements and possible movements of a ball with its own mass and porportions and an opponent. We could count layers upon layers of others things this kid is doing without thought, breathing, processing and responding to components inside his body such as adreneline, and a host of other things... but what it really comes down to is a child's Brain subconsciously is far more powerfull than any comp on the planet.

    The comparison of raw number crunching super-clusters to a human who is nearly autonomus, learns independantly and can adapt to many situations in the blink of an eye (where a comp would take considerable reprogramming to adjust to new tasks) is falacy at best.

    It has been predicted that AI will reach the emotional awareness of a teenager around 2050

    --Enter The Sig
    --

    --
    --Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
  11. Smarter! was: Re:uhu by seschmi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You underestimate your abilities by far - ever seen robots playing soccer? To hit a slowly rolling ball needs several MFLOPS, and every 2-year-old can easily do this. If you compare the the abilities of the robots to those of the average soccer player, you will see how easily the human brain can outperform a computer. On the other hand: Every time I listen to the interviews after a soccer match, I doubt if the statement above is true.

  12. The Brain: Facts by TheSync · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Neurons in adults: 2x10E9 to 5x10E9
    Synapses in adults: 10E14, a few thousand per neuron
    Neuron firings per second: max 2 Khz

    The biggest challenge in comparing brain to supercomputer is the massive connectivity of brain, with 2000-5000 synapses per neuron.

    The total processing speed of ASCII Purple sounds about right for number of neurons in brain times the maximum number of pulses per second per neuron.

    Given there are 10E14 synapses, each one with at least a byte of synpatic weight associated with it, it would need memory of at least around a petabyte of memory, although synpase memory change speeds are probably not faster than tape, and I know of plenty of installations with a petabyte on tape.

    But here is the kicker: Will those 100 teraflops be flops that can use thousands of inputs? Probably not. So I'd argue that to truly be as powerful as the human brain, you would need 100 petaflops of 1-2 input flops, with at least a petabyte tape system.

    1. Re:The Brain: Facts by MrGrendel · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Neuron firings per second: max 2 Khz
      Cortical neurons, which do most of the complex processing, only fire at about 1-5 Hz on average. Some neurons can fire in the kHz range, but not for very long.
      The total processing speed of ASCII Purple sounds about right for number of neurons in brain times the maximum number of pulses per second per neuron.
      It's a lot harder than that, which is what makes these kinds of estimations so silly. For one thing, 1 pulse does not equal 1 bit in a brain as it does in a transistor. A single firing of a neuron can transmit up to 3.5 bits. This is because the firing time is important to the information content and the activity of neighboring neurons is also important. A group of neurons firing all at once transmits much more information than those same neurons firing individually at random times (in most cases -- there are exceptions to this).
      Given there are 10E14 synapses, each one with at least a byte of synpatic weight associated with it, it would need memory of at least around a petabyte of memory
      You also need to keep track of the state of the neuron (membrane potential, neurotransmitter concentrations, etc). The state of the neuron and the recent activity of a synapse and its neighboring synapses influence how much the "weight" matters. Certain patterns of input count for more than others.

      Most of the calculations of brain processing power that you read about are made by people who either don't understand the problem or haven't thought about it enough. Our knowledge of how the brain processes and stores information is extremely primitive at this point, so any estimation of the processing power is not much more than a wild guess. As with other sciences, every answer we find raises more questions. The more we study the problem, the harder it becomes. One of the most difficult things to deal with is that the software is the hardware. To make matters worse, the hardware can (and does) change. It's a lot like a computer that builds and programs itself.

  13. anyone else tired of "boom boom" computers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Is it me, or is this at least #6 in a line of computers that cost billions yet do nothing more important than simulate at atomic explosion?

    Considering we can blow up the surface of the world a couple of times(at least) over with our existing stockpiles, why are we spending ANY money on ANYTHING except REDUCING said stockpiles?

    Atomic weapons do NOT need further refinement. We already have computers to simulate them, and I'm sure plenty of simulations have been done. Let's not forget all the real live testing we've done already(nothin' says Propaganda like a good ol' glowin' mushroom cloud!)

    Not to mention, it's pretty stupid to simulate said explosions. If one ever happened, its not like everyone is going to whip out their DOE charts and say "well, the computer simulations said that if an explosion happened in East Nowhere, it would reach out to..."

    Oh wait- let me guess. We need to simulate terrorist attack scenarios. Or maybe the NSA needs some extra computing power to crack terrorist encryption?

    1. Re:anyone else tired of "boom boom" computers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Seriously - reducing the need for large nuclear stockpiles exactly why the money's being spent on simulations. ...except that you'll find the research goes into building new and better bombs...not researching what happens with the old ones we have lying around.

      Your entire argument revolves around ignoring two things:

      a)Door Number Four, NOT USING NUCLEAR WEAPONS

      b)attacking virtually any country with nuclear weapons would start a world war, if not result in mutual destruction, if not a chain reaction drawing all the nuclear powers into a total earth annihilation.

      Maybe you've seen that graph where all the 'relations' between countries are drawn out?

      Try and remove any country on that diagram and not come within 1 or 2 legs of a country with nuclear weapons.

      Quite simply- nuclear weapons are USELESS. Notice how lots of countries don't have 'em, and are much better off for it?

      BTW- your comments about "a few hundred yards" show a complete lack of understanding of the scale of nuclear weapons. ALL of them are capable of taking out most of some of the world's largest cities. There's no such thing as a 'little' nuke.

      Go back to your math homework and piano lessons, kiddie.

  14. What OS? by yog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What operating system will this thing use? The linked article didn't say, except for something about "autonomic" self-diagnosing and repair, which is intriguing as well.

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
  15. Re:Adding numbers by Usquebaugh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But is the brain calculating this or rather looking up the answer? I know as a toddler I couldn't catch squat, but as I got older I got better. Was the reason increased proceesing power, my brain got bigger. Or more experience, I'd caught a lot more balls by then.

    I doubt very much the brain is clunking through calculus.

  16. Re:Adding numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I really have to ask, if it doesn't do calculus then how do you recomend you know where it's going to land?

    Unless there is a new form of math we have yet to discover (quite possible), calc is really the only way to determine that result.

    That is unless your saying we create a vast lookup table capable of storing all of our physical interactions (also quite possible).

    I was able to catch a football before I even studied mathematics, let alone arithmetic.

    I think you might be misunderstanding. Your conscious isn't your brain (if it were computers have already long surpassed the human mind). When we are saying your brain calculates all this we mean somewhere in the back of our mind it does this processing and passes the results back to you, and you never even know it happens.

  17. Wait a minute! by Etrigan_696 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    While the human brain is usually not very good at such linear calculations, hence the popularity of a calculator, its true power lies in it's massively parallel processing.


    Hold on there!
    Our brains are fine for huge linear calculations. Better than most calculators in fact.
    Autistic savants....
    Rain Main. That kind of thing.
    There was a kid I knew in high school that could find cube roots for eight digit numbers nearly instantly but he couldn't recognize his brother's face in a picture.

    My personal theory is this: Human brains are like a computer (about a million orders of mangitude more complex though). Most people have that all tied up in hardware dedicated to things like jobs, girl friends, football etc. etc.
    John, my autistic friend in high school, hadn't dedicated the hardware to anything in particular, but he still had it available. He was lacking in a lot of things, but sheer processing power and memory he had in spades.

    As a side story, another friend of mine in high school had epilepsy, and it kept getting worse. He eventually had brain surgery where they severed his corpus callosum. After that, he couldn't add single digit numbers if he closed his right eye. If he closed his left, he couldn't recognize faces. Just kind of shows how the brain works as a parallel system.
  18. Re:Well - the Orange Catholic Bible says: by Frobozz0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds like something a rich man would say to someone who propositions a money-less society.

    As awful as this may sound, it might be that carbon/organic life forms are the first in many evolutionary steps. It just might be that we will create "synthetic" life forms that turn out to not be synthetic at all. In turn, if we are good enough at what we do, we will be superceded by these beings. Or, perhaps, we will become them in the process.

    That's evolution for you.

    Perhaps our ultimate goal is to not only to be able to understand the universe, but to create a more advanced life form than our selves. Once we have solved every problem, there is no point to our existence and we will accept our fate-- we've solved the ultimate question, and now we're done.

    --
    "Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
  19. Human brain might be a quantum computer by Jon+Taylor · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Sir Roger Penrose, the brilliant methematical physicist, and Stuart Hammeroff, a medical researcher at the University of Arizona, have for years postulated that the human brain is a quantum computing substrate. Their hypothesis is that the cellular skeleton (cytoskeleton) of neurons, which is made up of so-called microtubules, functions as some type of quantum waveguide system, allowing for the production of large-scale coherent states of quantum superposition within the human nervous system. A nanotech quatum supercomputing neural net of amazing power might be between our ears! If this were to turn out to be true, one individual neuron might be more "powerful" than this whole computer!!! Perhaps this is unlikely, but given how little we know about the operation of large-scale logic in the brain, it cannot be ruled out. Penrose claims that this state of quantum superposition explains the sensations and operation of consciousness (a "soul" of sorts) as well. Read his book Shadows of the Mind for more info. There's lots of stuff about quantum consciousness on Hammeroff's page, too. Trippy stuff indeed.

    Jon

  20. Re:Adding numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Unless there is a new form of math we have yet to discover (quite possible), calc is really the only way to determine that result.

    Goddamn, and I thought I was a math geek, just because I enjoy it. Get a grip - not everything is mathematics, just because mathematics can be used to describe it.

    If someone throws me a ball, I *DON'T* know where it's going to land. I have to keep my eye on the ball. If I was really calculating the position via math, I could walk over to the spot, close my eyes and stick out my hand (excluding factors like wind... pretend we're throwing a ball indoors). Why does every sport constantly re-iterate: keep your eye on the ball, keep your eye on the ball? It's because you DON'T know where that fucking thing is going, and you need to adjust in real-time. There is no 'amazing calculus feat' being performed by your brain. It is an illusion, because you can come up with a complex calculus problem to describe the situation.

  21. Re:Barriers to AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What we need to do is create kernel that is designed to learn, and fulfill some simple needs. The first one being how to communicate. Take a look at Creature Labs for a fun view of what I mean. Now imagine this sort of thing going on with each "Norn" running on a big ass dedicated computer, and interacting via annother arbiter computer/cluster that creates their "world". It's fun to see them "play", but what whould happen if they were given bigger tasks, and unlimited resources?

    BTW, it's because Brains have really good pattern recognition and interpretation systems (eg, what's that? and what does it mean?).