Slashdot Mirror


Effort to Create Virtual Brain Begins

bryan8m writes "An IBM supercomputer running on 22.8 teraflops of processing power will be involved in an effort to create the first computer simulation of the entire human brain. From the article: 'The hope is that the virtual brain will help shed light on some aspects of human cognition, such as perception, memory and perhaps even consciousness.' It should also help us understand brain malfunctions and 'observe the electrical code our brains use to represent the world.'"

26 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Thoughts on virtual thoughts by IO+ERROR · · Score: 5, Insightful
    All it takes to simulate a human brain is 22.8 teraflops? I thought I was smarter than that.

    Seriously, they expect it to take a decade to complete. By 2015, we could probably get processors with that kind of power from the local computer store. Then everyone could have their own virtual brain...wait, are they going to GPL this?

    So what happens if this thing develops a consciousness?

    --
    How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    1. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by buswolley · · Score: 4, Funny
      Well we kill it of course.

      We kill things with consciousness all the time.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    2. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by Slashcrunch · · Score: 5, Funny

      As far as how much processing power is needed to simulate the brain, I've met quite a few people for whom a C64 and a tape drive would be more than sufficient... and maybe some duct tape.

    3. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 4, Informative
      All it takes to simulate a human brain is 22.8 teraflops? I thought I was smarter than that.

      From the article:
      ... [T]he initial phase of Blue Brain will model the electrical structure of neocortical columns - neural circuits that are repeated throughout the brain. ... "These are the network units of the brain," says Markram. Measuring just 0.5 millimetres by 2 mm, these units contain between 10 and 70,000 neurons, depending upon the species.

      In other words, one day they hope to simulate a whole brain, but to begin with they'll be modelling the behaviour of a particular neural unit - with physical data derived from many, many slices of mouse brains.

      In terms of deciphering the behaviour of relatively large numbers of neurons, it could be incredibly useful (and once the model is tuned would mean fewer messy, difficult and unpleasant experiments involving live animals, brain electrodes and whatnot) - but it's admittedly only a small first step toward modelling a whole brain of any species. Still, it's one of the necessary building blocks - and any moral issues are left as an exercise for the reader... ;-)
      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    4. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by baryon351 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > So what happens if this thing develops a consciousness?

      Yes. That's what has me thinking. Not that I think we should stop, but it's going to be a disturbing moment when the techs running these things get to a point where they ask a simulation brain questions, get it to perform tasks, get it to react like a human does...

      ...and it says it's scared. or alone. or just wants a friend.

    5. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by venicebeach · · Score: 5, Informative

      All it takes to simulate a human brain is 22.8 teraflops? I thought I was smarter than that.

      You are.

      According to the Business Week article this thing will be simulating about 10 thousand neurons. The human brain has about 100 billion neurons. This will be simulating a small section of cortex, not an entire brain. The goal seems to be to understand how cortical columns work, not to create a simulated mind. They actually will not even have enough "neurons" to match one human cortical column, but will probably still learn alot about the circuitry....

    6. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
      A decade?
      Give me a shovel and a dark night and I'll get you some real brains, second-hand. And at only 1/2 the cost.

      Sincerely,
      Igor

    7. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Funny
      TFA does mention mouse brain,

      ... and the output of the computer will be a two-digit number.

    8. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by William+Robinson · · Score: 5, Funny
      You are wrong about neutrons. They are protons, that connect and interact to form intelligent thoughts.

      Neutrons are responsible for indifferent behaviour towards females. Recent study shows that slashdotters have enough neutrons emitted from their brain, that, they could be used as substitude of Californium 252.

      Electrons decide the level of excitement. Thats why you feel charged, after couple of beers:)

    9. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by Oligonicella · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're talking out yer butt on a couple of issues. First, they are not simple. Their many axions each have many dentrites. Their responses change depending upon the hormone bath that they live in. Second, they do indeed 'morph' throughout life. They can even repair. This is especially true of the dendrites.

      You're pretty correct on the wiring, although not at the level you wrote. The basic connectivity and structure is known, but each and every brain is wired from experience, not just birth.

      It's worth trying, and we will learn a lot regardless. We just won't learn as much about the brain as one might think.

    10. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      As every nerd should know, a 6502 processor is entirely sufficient for travelling in time, impersonating a violent human being and speaking in a barely-comprehensible Austrian accent.

    11. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by ColaMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      (chopped from various web sources)

      Some of the most successful early computers were analog computers, capable of performing advanced calculus problems rather quickly. Before digital computers became the mainstay of computing, analog computers were quite common. Analog computers use varying voltages and currents to represent variables, and various types of amplifiers to represent factors in differential equations, with the result being a final voltage or current that can be read out on a meter or graph. Analog computers were heavily used in process control situations, such as calculating the correct aiming of the big guns on board a battleship. Many variables had to be considered simultaneously, including the position of the ship, the position of the target, the type of ammunition, the wind and other weather conditions, the constant motion of the ship from the action of the sea, and myriad other variables. The analog computer would simultaneously combine all of these variables to generate a real-time result that would control the large servomechanisms that aimed the guns to assure that their ordinance would be delivered accurately to the target.

      They were,however, a real bitch to sort out. So the computer world focused upon digital designs, which , it turned out, were a lot easier to do.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    12. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by Somato_gastric · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hold your horses! There is abundant evidence that single neurons can perform more complex operations than a mere 'sigmoid fuunction'. That is a working approximation that can be useful from the point of view of simulations but that is all.

      Single neurons can potentially perform computations at the level of the of the passive cable equation. At the level of active membrane properties when added to those passive canle equation solutions. At the level of genetic instructions becoming activated in the nucleus and dendrites in response to activity. And finally the plasticity or learning rules that neurons use are not only computational very important but probably quite varied from brain region to region. Spike timing dependent plasticity for example allows the brain to pick out persistent correlations within highly noisy inputs. None of this is included in the impoverised neural-network viewpoint of 'sigmoids'

      The real question is why are they doing this? Markram is a top researcher and knows what he is doing. But i quesiton the motivations of big blue. i wouldnt be suprised if they didnt give two hoots about the science but rather are only doing this so that they can get the kind of publicity that posts on slashdot bring. Remember 'Deep Blue'? Lets hope they dont treat Markram like they did Kasparov

    13. Re:Thoughts on virtual thoughts by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Informative
      " As every nerd should know, a 6502 processor is entirely sufficient for travelling in time..."

      for those of you who didn't get that joke.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  2. Obligatory HAL quote by harlemjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "without your space helmet Dave, you're going to find that rather difficult"

    2001

    --
    shooting is not too good for my enemies
  3. Structure and Function by racecarj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What's interesting about this type of study is the possible philosophical arguments that come up...

    Our brains are made of mostly water, carbon, etc.... which form neurons. This is only important in the sense that we are what we are because these neurons are able to take a set structure, where neurons interconnect, and then have a specific function, where they fire.

    There's nothing magical about these neurons. Let's say that you could replace these neurons with say, ultra-small marbles, that could take the same structure and perform the same function... It is logical to think that this marble-brain would be an actual brain, the same as any other. It would be a person.

    So if they're simulating a brain virtually, but this virtual construct simulates the structure and function correctly, would this virtual brain be aware? Would it be a "person"? I personally, would say that it would. But then, is it moral to ever shut such a simulation off (murder)? Or create it in a virtual world without any other virtual brains to talk to (torture)? Or create it at all for the use of an experiment?

  4. Life.. don't talk to me about life.. by shadowcode · · Score: 5, Funny

    In 10 years, I bet the first readout will read;
    "I think you ought to know that I'm feeling very depressed"

  5. In other news by Einherjer · · Score: 5, Funny

    They needed a simple brain to begin their modelling with.

    They decided on George W. Bush.

    Let's just hope....

    hmmm....

    I for one welcome our new artificial dumb military overlord.

  6. Re:brains for those who have none ... by madaxe42 · · Score: 5, Funny

    but what to do with a schizophrenic supercomputer ?

    Dual boot!

  7. Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it a male or a female brain they're simulating?

    They work quite differently you know.
    Some even speculate that one of those two kinds of brain might need even less than 22.8 Teraflops to simulate.

    1. Re:Umm... by AndroidCat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Some early work was done with both. They set them up to monitor each other's output for correctness. There was a snag in that the output of the male brain was always flagged as incorrect. Removing the interface or even powering down the female brain made no difference, the male brain was always wrong.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  8. Mentifex by FleaPlus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wow, did you really just link to Mentifex's page? For those not familiar with him, he's an infamous kook from the early days of Usenet who spammed newsgroups claiming (and still claims to this day) that he's "solved AI" and implemented it in Forth and JavaScript. More recently, he's expanded onto places like slashdot.

    There's a fairly extensive FAQ on him here:

    http://www.nothingisreal.com/mentifex_faq.html

    1. Re:Mentifex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      A fun though struck me when reading the FAQ.

      Noone seem to have real contact with murray, and his adress was not really known. He also seem to have a little to much time on is hands, posting huge amounts of usenet posts etc. What if Murray did succeed a long time agoo, and is now letting his virtual brain (that somehow thinks it is murray) do all his spamming for him.

      Of course, this theory lacks in many points... :P

  9. Wishful thinking by bloodredsun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As someone who's spent many years as a neurophysiology researcher before becoming a programmer I feel I may have a bit more insight than the average person. What this project boils down to is a simplistic model of the simplist unit of operation of one area of the brain (neocortical column). Anyone who has followed research into areas such as epilepsy and memory will know of the massive gaps in our understanding of the realtionship of the brain and the mind. So this "first computer simulation of the entire human brain" is neither accurate in the sense that they are not simulating the human brain, nor are they the first to try what they are attempting. They only difference here is that they have the very public backing of a major corporation who understand the benefit of good publicity.

    This sort of research is fascinating and despetately needs to be done, but it does no one any favours when people associate tabloid style headlines to it. The days when we wear Richard Morgan style "stacks" are still as far away as ever unfortunately.

  10. Had to be said... by soloport · · Score: 4, Funny

    22.8 teraflops of processing power should be enough for anybody.