Slashdot Mirror


Silicon Brains That Think As Fast As a Fly Can Smell

Nerval's Lobster writes "Researchers in Germany have discovered what they say is a way to get computers to do more than execute all the steps of a problem-solving calculation as fast as possible – by getting them to imitate the human brain's habit of finding shortcuts to the right answer. A team of scientists from Freie Universität Berlin, the Bernstein Center Berlin, and Heidelberg University have refined the idea of parallel computing into one they describe as neuromorphic computing. In their design, a whole series of processors designed as silicon neurons rather than ordinary CPUs are linked together in a network similar to the highly interconnected mesh that links nerve cells in the human brain. Problems fed into the neuro mesh are broken up and processed in parallel, but not always using the same process. The method by which neuromorphic processors handle problems varies with the way they're linked together, as is the case with neurons in the brain. The chips are designed to copy the layout and functions of brain cells, but the way they're interconnected is based on another highly efficient biological model. 'The design of the network architecture has been inspired by the odor-processing nervous system of insects,' said one of the researchers. 'This system is optimized by nature for a highly parallel processing of the complex chemical world.' In tests using real-world datasets, the prototype was able to match the performance of specialized Bayeseian pattern-matching systems. Even better, the stable decisions reached by 'output neuron populations' take approximately 100 milliseconds, which is the same speed required by the insect nervous systems on which the network design is based, according to the paper."

4 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. Great. Low-quality evolutionary "solutions" by gweihir · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Solutions that evolution produces (whether real or simulated) typically suck, as they are typically just good enough for the training criteria and may even completely fail longer term. This really is nonsense, unless you have very low quality requirements. And, unlike a solution based on understanding how to solve something, this bio-inspired stuff cannot easily be improved incrementally from seeing how it performs in practice.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Great. Low-quality evolutionary "solutions" by q.kontinuum · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not always true. I can't find the link right now, but in Science of the Discworld, Terry Pratchett references a work where a bandpass filter was designed using genetic algorithms, and used less elements while working better than straight forward designed circuits. What's more, there are some apparently void elements in the circuit, but still the circuit stops working when these elements are removed. I wasn't able to find the work in a hurry, but while looking for it I got the impression there seems to be a lot of work ongoing related to frequency filters and GA.

      --
      Trolling is a art!
    2. Re:Great. Low-quality evolutionary "solutions" by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Solutions that evolution produces (whether real or simulated) typically suck, ...

      Evolutionary solutions do not suck at all. In fact they are often brilliant and most optimized solution with lots and lots resilience. The digital camera sensors still do not have the dynamic range of mammalian eye. Robot touch sensors still don't have the dynamic range of our finger tips. We still can't mimic a geckos adaptive suction pads to create a vehicle that runs up in vertical walls. Heck, that little suction holder for my GPS keeps falling down.

      What sucks is the evolutionary process that is prodigal in its use of resources and time. On the large mammal end (elephants, gorillas, humans, whales) a typical female produces about 10 off spring (without assistance/interference from humans and modern tech). On the insect level, they produce hundreds of off spring, most of them die, a few survive for the next generation. Evolution, if we were to anthropomorphize it, would not flinch at producing 10 to 100 times more output than needed, picking 10% or 1% of the output and discarding the rest. Trees produce billions of pollen grains and their success rate, measured by how many of them end up as mature trees of the next generation is measured in parts per trillion. What if it takes 10 million generations to find the optimal solution? Well, so be it. Mother Evolution would say. What if entire species specialize too much and lose their ability to adapt for changing environment? Mother Evolution does not care, there are other species willing to fill their niche, should they go extinct.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  2. Re:uh... what? by Goldsmith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You're pointing to articles on high end mammalian brain structures when TFA is referring to the most basic structures in an insect brain. Also, this blanket assumption that no one could possibly understand the complexity of a small group of neurons is way out of date.

    Olfactory circuits are pretty well understood. This isn't the first simulation of neurons mimicking an olfactory bulb at the single neuron level. We've been watching videos and seeing presentations of these models for years now. What is neat, here, is that they're modeling a somewhat realistic hardware instantiation of a model (as in, this is something which maybe could be built).

    I come at this from the other end. I make the chemical sensing hardware that mimics the response of a biological chemical sensor (an artificial insect 'nose'). There are long running collaborations between my field and neuromorphic computing folks to develop a combined sensor-processor that can electronically understand smell in the same way a living thing does. I have to sit through their talks on modeling neurons, and they have to sit through my talks on nanosensor arrays.