DOCSLIB.ORG

From the Neuron Doctrine to Neural Networks

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From the Neuron Doctrine to Neural Networks LINK TO ORIGINAL ARTICLE LINK TO INITIAL CORRESPONDENCE other hand, one of my mentors, David Tank, argued that for a true understanding of a On testing neural network models neural circuit we should be able to actu- ally build it, which is a stricter definition Rafael Yuste of a successful theory (D. Tank, personal communication) Finally, as mentioned in In my recent Timeline article, I described existing neural network models have enough the Timeline article, one will also need to the emergence of neural network models predictive value to be considered valid or connect neural network models to theories as an important paradigm in neuroscience useful for explaining brain circuits.” (REF. 1)). and facts at the structural and biophysical research (From the neuron doctrine to neu- There are many exciting areas of progress levels of neural circuits and to those in cog- ral networks. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 16, 487–497 in current neuroscience detailing phenom- nitive sciences as well, for proper ‘scientific (2015))1. In his correspondence (Neural enology that is consistent with some neural knowledge’ to occur in the Kantian sense. networks in the future of neuroscience network models, some of which I tried to research. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. http://dx.doi. summarize and illustrate, but at the same Rafael Yuste is at the Neurotechnology Center and org/10.1038/nrn4042 (2015))2, Rubinov time we are still far from a rigorous demon- Kavli Institute of Brain Sciences, Departments of provides some thoughtful comments about stration of any neural network model with Biological Sciences and Neuroscience, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA. the distinction between artificial neural causal experiments. I therefore could not networks and biologically inspired ones and agree more with Rubinov that we still have e-mail: [email protected] about how a strictly data-driven approach “largely not bridged the gap between elegant may succeed at providing a general theory theory and neuroscientific observation”. But doi:10.1038/nrn4043 Published online 21 October 2015 of neural circuits. I thank Rubinov for these when will we know that we have bridged that comments and note that this theory agnosti- gap? This is a difficult question to answer, 1. Yuste, R. From the neuron doctrine to neural networks. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 16, 487–497 (2015). cism is a methodological approach that we depending on the particular viewpoint, 2. Rubinov, M. Neural networks in the future of respect and indeed sponsored in our Brain and I would leave this open to the reader’s neuroscience research. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. http://dx. doi.org/10.1038/nrn4042 (2015). Activity Map proposal that led to the BRAIN own interpretation. In my mind, a success- 3. Alivisatos, A. P. et al. The brain activity map project Initiative3. Also, although in my Timeline ful neural model should have quantitative and the challenge of functional connectomics. Neuron article I tried to provide a brief summary accuracy in predicting either the behaviour, 74, 970–974 (2012). of the history of artificial neural network mental or perceptual state of the animal, or Acknowledgements The author is supported by the US National Institutes of models, I am not yet personally convinced at least the future internal dynamics of the Health (DP1EY024503) and ARO W911NF-12-1-0594 that there are clear instances in which a bio- system. Another characteristic of a success- (MURI). logically inspired neural network model has ful model could be its effective use in design- Competing interests statement yet been validated (“…it is unclear whether ing therapies of brain-based diseases. On the The author declares no competing interests. © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved CORRESPONDENCE LINK TO ORIGINAL ARTICLE LINK TO AUTHOR’S REPLY Mikail Rubinov is at the Department of Psychiatry and Churchill College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0DS, UK; and the Janelia Research Neural networks in the future of Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, Virginia 20147, USA. neuroscience research e-mail: [email protected] doi:10.1038/nrn4042 Mikail Rubinov Published online 21 October 2015 1. Yuste, R. From the neuron doctrine to neural networks. Neural networks are increasingly seen to Yuste’s emphasis on some classic artificial Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 16, 487–497 (2015). 2. Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L. & The PDP Research supersede neurons as fundamental units neural network models does not seem to be Group. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in of complex brain function. In his Timeline supported by the evidence of, or the promise the Microstructure of Cognition (MIT Press, 1986). 3. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. & Hinton, G. Deep learning. article (From the neuron doctrine to neural for, the problem-solving capacity of these Nature 521, 436–444 (2015). networks. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 16, 487–497 models in neuroscience6. 4. Marcus, G. in The Future of the Brain: Essays by the World’s Leading Neuroscientists (eds Marcus, G. & 1 (2015)) , Yuste provides a timely overview What could be an alternative promising Freeman, J.) 205–215 (Princeton Univ. Press, 2014). of this process, but does not clearly differ- approach to biologically valid neural network 5. Zador, A. in The Future of the Brain: Essays by the World’s Leading Neuroscientists (eds Marcus, G. & entiate between biological neural network modelling? At present we can only specu- Freeman, J.) 40–49 (Princeton Univ. Press, 2014). models (broadly and imprecisely defined late, but the ongoing development of high- 6. Laudan, L. Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth (University of California as empirically valid models of (embodied) resolution high-throughput brain imaging Press, 1978). neuronal or brain systems, which enable technologies — including those being devel- 7. Alivisatos, A. P. et al. Nanotools for neuroscience and brain activity mapping. ACS Nano 7, 1850–1866 (2013). 7 the emergence of complex brain function oped as part of the BRAIN Initiative — and 8. Oh, S. W. et al. A mesoscale connectome of the mouse through distributed computation) and arti- the consequent availability of increasingly brain. Nature 508, 207–214 (2014). 9. Ahrens, M. B. et al. Brain-wide neuronal dynamics 8 9 ficial neural network models (a relatively large structural and functional imaging during motor adaptation in zebrafish. Nature 485, well-defined class of networks originally data sets, make it appealing to initially search 471–477 (2012). 10. Sporns, O. Discovering the Human Connectome (MIT 2 designed to model complex brain function for patterns in such data in less theory- Press, 2012). but now mainly viewed as a class of biologi- bound and more data-driven ways10,11, and 11. Vogelstein, J. T. et al. Discovery of brainwide neural- behavioral maps via multiscale unsupervised structure cally inspired data-analysis algorithms useful to subsequently construct theories a priori learning. Science 344, 386–392 (2014). in diverse scientific fields3). constrained on these discovered patterns12. A 12. Sejnowski, T. J., Churchland, P. S. & Movshon, J. A. Putting big data to good use in neuroscience. Nat. A distinction between biological and arti- famous example of this approach in biology Neurosci. 17, 1440–1441 (2014). ficial neural network models is important is the formulation of the theory of evolution 13. Kell, D. B. & Oliver, S. G. Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of as the neuroscience network paradigm is by natural selection; this theory arose from inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post- mainly driven by the aim of uncovering bio- an initial aim to catalogue all living biological genomic era. BioEssays 26, 99–105 (2004). 14. Helmstaedter, M. et al. Connectomic reconstruction of logically valid mechanisms of neural com- organisms on earth, and from a subsequent the inner plexiform layer in the mouse retina. Nature putation. Artificial neural networks were careful analysis of the obtained diverse bio- 500, 168–174 (2013). 13 initially proposed as candidate models for logical data . Interestingly, artificial neural Acknowledgements such computation but, despite being enthu- networks may yet prove to be important in The author thanks C. Chang for helpful comments. The author has received funding from the NARSAD Young Investigator siastically researched at the end of the twen- this quest but in the role of powerful tools for Award, the Isaac Newton Trust Research Grant and the Parke tieth century, they have largely not bridged analysing complex imaging data sets14, rather Davis Exchange Fellowship. the gap between elegant theory and neu- than as a theoretical foundation for how the Competing interests statement roscientific observation4,5. In this context, brain computes. The author declares no competing interests. NATURE REVIEWS | NEUROSCIENCE www.nature.com/reviews/neuro © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved PERSPECTIVES be a useful paradigm, or act as guideposts, to TIMELINE understand many brain computations. This article does not provide an exhaustive review From the neuron doctrine to but instead illustrates with a small number of examples the transition between these two neural networks paradigms of neuroscience. History of the neuron doctrine Rafael Yuste Origins. Many neuroscience textbooks begin Abstract | For over a century, the neuron doctrine — which states that the neuron by explaining Cajal’s proposal that the unit of the structure of the nervous system is is the structural and functional unit of the nervous system — has provided a the individual neuron2,16,17 (FIGS 1,2a). This conceptual foundation for neuroscience. This viewpoint reflects its origins in a time idea, actively debated at the time, contrasted when the use of single-neuron anatomical and physiological techniques was with the ‘reticular theory’ — defended by prominent. However, newer multineuronal recording methods have revealed that Golgi himself — which hypothesized that ensembles of neurons, rather than individual cells, can form physiological units and neurons were linked in a single overarch- ing syncytium1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cajal's Law of Dynamic Polarization: Mechanism and Design
    philosophies Article Cajal’s Law of Dynamic Polarization: Mechanism and Design Sergio Daniel Barberis ID Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Instituto de Filosofía “Dr. Alejandro Korn”, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, PO 1406, Argentina; sbarberis@filo.uba.ar Received: 8 February 2018; Accepted: 11 April 2018; Published: 16 April 2018 Abstract: Santiago Ramón y Cajal, the primary architect of the neuron doctrine and the law of dynamic polarization, is considered to be the founder of modern neuroscience. At the same time, many philosophers, historians, and neuroscientists agree that modern neuroscience embodies a mechanistic perspective on the explanation of the nervous system. In this paper, I review the extant mechanistic interpretation of Cajal’s contribution to modern neuroscience. Then, I argue that the extant mechanistic interpretation fails to capture the explanatory import of Cajal’s law of dynamic polarization. My claim is that the definitive formulation of Cajal’s law of dynamic polarization, despite its mechanistic inaccuracies, embodies a non-mechanistic pattern of reasoning (i.e., design explanation) that is an integral component of modern neuroscience. Keywords: Cajal; law of dynamic polarization; mechanism; utility; design 1. Introduction The Spanish microanatomist and Nobel laureate Santiago Ramón y Cajal (1852–1934), the primary architect of the neuron doctrine and the law of dynamic polarization, is considered to be the founder of modern neuroscience [1,2]. According to the neuron doctrine, the nerve cell is the anatomical, physiological, and developmental unit of the nervous system [3,4]. To a first approximation, the law of dynamic polarization states that nerve impulses are exactly polarized in the neuron; in functional terms, the dendrites and the cell body work as a reception device, the axon works as a conduction device, and the terminal arborizations of the axon work as an application device.
    [Show full text]
  • The Churchlands' Neuron Doctrine: Both Cognitive and Reductionist
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231998559 The Churchlands' neuron doctrine: Both cognitive and reductionist Article in Behavioral and Brain Sciences · October 1999 DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X99462193 CITATIONS READS 2 20 1 author: John Sutton Macquarie University 139 PUBLICATIONS 1,356 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by John Sutton on 06 August 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately. The Churchlands’ neuron doctrine: both cognitive and reductionist John Sutton Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22 (1999), 850-1. [email protected] http://johnsutton.net/ Commentary on Gold & Stoljar, ‘A Neuron Doctrine in the Philosophy of Neuroscience’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22 (1999), 809-869: full paper and commentaries online at: http://www.stanford.edu/~paulsko/papers/GSND.pdf Abstract: According to Gold and Stoljar, one cannot both consistently be reductionist about psychoneural relations and invoke concepts developed in the psychological sciences. I deny the utility of their distinction between biological and cognitive neuroscience, suggesting that they construe biological neuroscience too rigidly and cognitive neuroscience too liberally. Then I reject their characterization of reductionism: reductions need not go down past neurobiology straight to physics, and cases of partial, local reduction are not neatly distinguishable from cases of mere implementation. Modifying the argument from unification-as-reduction, I defend a position weaker than the radical, but stronger than the trivial neuron doctrine.
    [Show full text]
  • UNDERSTANDING the BRAIN Tbook Collections
    FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES ARCHIVES UNDERSTANDING THE BRAIN TBook Collections Copyright © 2015 The New York Times Company. All rights reserved. Cover Photograph by Zach Wise for The New York Times This ebook was created using Vook. All of the articles in this work originally appeared in The New York Times. eISBN: 9781508000877 The New York Times Company New York, NY www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com/tbooks Obama Seeking to Boost Study of Human Brain By JOHN MARKOFF FEB. 17, 2013 The Obama administration is planning a decade-long scientific effort to examine the workings of the human brain and build a comprehensive map of its activity, seeking to do for the brain what the Human Genome Project did for genetics. The project, which the administration has been looking to unveil as early as March, will include federal agencies, private foundations and teams of neuroscientists and nanoscientists in a concerted effort to advance the knowledge of the brain’s billions of neurons and gain greater insights into perception, actions and, ultimately, consciousness. Scientists with the highest hopes for the project also see it as a way to develop the technology essential to understanding diseases like Alzheimer’sand Parkinson’s, as well as to find new therapies for a variety of mental illnesses. Moreover, the project holds the potential of paving the way for advances in artificial intelligence. The project, which could ultimately cost billions of dollars, is expected to be part of the president’s budget proposal next month. And, four scientists and representatives of research institutions said they had participated in planning for what is being called the Brain Activity Map project.
    [Show full text]
  • Richard Scheller and Thomas Südhof Receive the 2013 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award
    Richard Scheller and Thomas Südhof receive the 2013 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award Jillian H. Hurst J Clin Invest. 2013;123(10):4095-4101. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI72681. News Neural communication underlies all brain activity. It governs our thoughts, feelings, sensations, and actions. But knowing the importance of neural communication does not answer a central question of neuroscience: how do individual neurons communicate? We know that communication between two neurons occurs at specialized cell junctions called synapses, at which two communicating neurons are separated by the synaptic cleft. The presynaptic neuron releases chemicals, known as neurotransmitters, into the synaptic cleft in which neurotransmitters bind to receptors on the surface of the postsynaptic neuron. Neurotransmitter release occurs in response to an action potential within the sending neuron that induces depolarization of the nerve terminal and causes an influx of calcium. Calcium influx triggers the release of neurotransmitters through a specialized form of exocytosis in which neurotransmitter-filled vesicles fuse with the plasma membrane of the presynaptic nerve terminal in a region known as the active zone, spilling neurotransmitter into the synaptic cleft. By the 1950s, it was clear that brain function depended on chemical neurotransmission; however, the molecular activities that governed neurotransmitter release were virtually unknown until the early 1990s. This year, the Lasker Foundation honors Richard Scheller (Genentech) and Thomas Südhof (Stanford University School of Medicine) for their “discoveries concerning the molecular machinery and regulatory mechanisms that underlie the rapid release of neurotransmitters.” Over the course of two decades, Scheller […] Find the latest version: https://jci.me/72681/pdf News Richard Scheller and Thomas Südhof receive the 2013 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award Neural communication underlies all Setting the stage um-driven action potentials elicited neu- brain activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Neuron: Electrolytic Theory & Framework for Understanding Its
    Neuron: Electrolytic Theory & Framework for Understanding its operation Abstract: The Electrolytic Theory of the Neuron replaces the chemical theory of the 20th Century. In doing so, it provides a framework for understanding the entire Neural System to a comprehensive and contiguous level not available previously. The Theory exposes the internal workings of the individual neurons to an unprecedented level of detail; including describing the amplifier internal to every neuron, the Activa, as a liquid-crystalline semiconductor device. The Activa exhibits a differential input and a single ended output, the axon, that may bifurcate to satisfy its ultimate purpose. The fundamental neuron is recognized as a three-terminal electrolytic signaling device. The fundamental neuron is an analog signaling device that may be easily arranged to process pulse signals. When arranged to process pulse signals, its axon is typically myelinated. When multiple myelinated axons are grouped together, the group are labeled “white matter” because of their translucent which scatters light. In the absence of myelination, groups of neurons and their extensions are labeled “dark matter.” The dark matter of the Central Nervous System, CNS, are readily divided into explicit “engines” with explicit functional duties. The duties of the engines of the Neural System are readily divided into “stages” to achieve larger characteristic and functional duties. Keywords: Activa, liquid-crystalline, semiconductors, PNP, analog circuitry, pulse circuitry, IRIG code, 2 Neurons & the Nervous System The NEURONS and NEURAL SYSTEM This material is excerpted from the full β-version of the text. The final printed version will be more concise due to further editing and economical constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Circuit Neuroscience: the Road Ahead
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided byGR ColumbiaAND University CHALLE AcademicNGE Commons Circuit neuroscience: the road ahead Rafael Yuste HHMI, Department of Biological Sciences, Columbia University, USA Correspondence: [email protected] It is difficult to write about grand challenges in our field without pontificating or pre- tending to show a degree of certainty in assessing the field that I do not possess. I would rather comment on a few of the issues that particularly worry me. Therefore, this article is just a snapshot of our field now, as I see it, and encourage readers to read it as the opinion of just one of their colleagues. My comments are aimed at Circuit Neuroscience. What exactly is Circuit Neuroscience? Rafael Yuste studied Medicine at the Universidad As stated in the mission statement of Frontiers in Neural Circuits, I follow the definition Autonoma and the Fundacion of Circuit Neuroscience as the understanding of the computational function of neural cir- Jimenez Diaz Hospital in Madrid. After a brief period cuits, linking this function with the circuit micro-structure. Within this field, I will address in Sydney Brenner’s group three different types of challenges: scientific, methodological and sociological ones. at the LMB in Cambridge, he obtained his PhD with Larry Katz in Torsten Scientific problems: Wiesel’s laboratory, at I think that it is fair to say that we are profoundly ignorant about the structure and func- Rockefeller University tion of neural circuits. One could say that the goal of our field is to reverse-engineer in New York.
    [Show full text]
  • The Brain Activity Map Project and the Challenge of Functional Connectomics
    Neuron NeuroView The Brain Activity Map Project and the Challenge of Functional Connectomics A. Paul Alivisatos,1 Miyoung Chun,2 George M. Church,3 Ralph J. Greenspan,4 Michael L. Roukes,5 and Rafael Yuste6,* 1Materials Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and Department of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 2The Kavli Foundation, Oxnard, CA 93030, USA 3Department of Genetics and Wyss Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA 4Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA 5Kavli Nanoscience Institute and Departments of Physics, Applied Physics, and Bioengineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA 6HHMI, Department Biological Sciences, Kavli Institute for Brain Science, Columbia University New York, NY 10027, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.006 The function of neural circuits is an emergent property that arises from the coordinated activity of large numbers of neurons. To capture this, we propose launching a large-scale, international public effort, the Brain Activity Map Project, aimed at reconstructing the full record of neural activity across complete neural circuits. This technological challenge could prove to be an invaluable step toward understanding fundamental and pathological brain processes. ‘‘The behavior of large and com- To explore these jungles, neuroscientists bles. Because of this, measuring emer- plex aggregates of elementary have traditionally relied on electrodes gent functional states, such as dynamical particles, it turns out, is not to be that sample brain activity only very attractors, could be more useful for char- understood in terms of a simple sparsely—from one to a few neurons acterizing the functional properties of a extrapolation of the properties of a within a given region.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1. History of Astrocytes
    CHAPTER 1 History of Astrocytes OUTLINE Overview 2 Camillo Golgi 16 Naming of the “Astrocyte” 18 Neuron Doctrine 2 Santiago Ramón y Cajal and Glial Purkinje and Valentin’s Kugeln 2 Functions 18 Scheiden, Schwann, and Cell Theory 3 Glial Alterations in Neurological Remak’s Remarkable Observation 4 Disease: Early Concepts 21 The Neurohistology of Robert Bentley Todd 5 Wilder Penfield, Pío Del Río-Hortega, Wilhelm His’ Seminal Contributions 7 and Delineation of the Fridtjof Nansen: The Renaissance Man 8 “Third Element” 22 Auguste Forel: Neurohistology, Penfield’s Idea to Go to Spain 24 Myrmecology, and Sexology 8 Types of Neuroglia 26 Rudolph Albert Von Kölliker: Penfield’s Description of Oligodendroglia 27 Neurohistologist and Cajal Champion 10 Coming Together: The Fruit of Penfield’s Waldeyer and the Neuronlehre Spanish Expedition 30 (Neuron Doctrine) 11 Beginning of the Modern Era 33 Conclusion 12 References 34 Development of the Concept of Neuroglia 12 Rudolf Virchow 12 Other Investigators Develop More Detailed Images of Neuroglial Cells 15 Astrocytes and Epilepsy DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802401-0.00001-6 1 © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 2 1. HIStorY OF AStrocYTES OVERVIEW In this introduction to the history of astrocytes, we wish to accomplish the following goals: (1) contextualize the evolution of the concept of neuroglia within the development of cell theory and the “neuron doctrine”; (2) explain how the concept of neuroglia arose and evolved; (3) provide an interesting overview of some of the investigators involved in defin- ing the cell types in the central nervous system (CNS); (4) select the interaction of Wilder Penfield and Pío del Río-Hortega for a more in-depth historical vignette portraying a critical period during which glial cell types were being identified, described, and separated; and (5) briefly summarize further developments that presaged the modern era of neurogliosci- ence.
    [Show full text]
  • A Systemic Analysis of the Ideas Immanent in Neuromodulation
    University of Southampton Research Repository ePrints Soton Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given e.g. AUTHOR (year of submission) "Full thesis title", University of Southampton, name of the University School or Department, PhD Thesis, pagination http://eprints.soton.ac.uk UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON A Systemic Analysis of the Ideas Immanent in Neuromodulation by Christopher Laurie Buckley A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Engineering, Science and Mathematics School of Electronics and Computer Science February 2008 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS SCHOOL OF ELECTRONICS AND COMPUTER SCIENCE Doctor of Philosophy by Christopher Laurie Buckley This thesis focuses on the phenomena of neuromodulation — these are a set of diffuse chemical pathways that modify the properties of neurons and act in concert with the more traditional pathways mediated by synapses (neurotransmission). There is a grow- ing opinion within neuroscience that such processes constitute a radical challenge to the centrality of neurotransmission in our understanding of the nervous system.
    [Show full text]
  • Neuroanatomical Foundations of Cognition 39 Empirical Engagement
    36 Neurophilosophical Foundations van Heerdcn, P. 1963: Theory of optical information in solids. Applied Optics, 2, 393-400. Vartanian, A. 1953: Diderot and Descartes: A Study of Scientific Natumlism in the Enlightm­ 3 mmt. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Vartanian, A. 1973: Dictionary of the History of ltleas: Swtiies of Selected Pit·otal Ideas, ed. P. P. Wiener. New York: Scribners. von Neumann, J. 1958: The Compuur and the Brain. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Neuroanatomical Foundations Wiener, N. 1948: Cybemetics, of Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. of Cognition: Connecting the Neuronal Level with the Study of Higher Brain Areas Jennifer Mundale 1 Introduction In the philosophy of any science, it is important to consider how that science orga­ nizes itself with respect to its characteristic areas of inquiry. In the case of neuro­ science, it is important to recognize that many neuroscientists approach the brain as a stratified system. In other words, it is generally acknowledged that there is a wide range of levels at which to investigate the brain, ranging from the micro to the macro level with respect to both anatomical scope and functional complexity. The follow­ ing list of neuroanatomical kinds, for example, is ordered from the micro to the macro level: neurotransmitters, synapses, neurons, pathways, brain areas, systems, the brain, and central nervous system. For philosophers of neuroscience, it is heuristically useful £O understand that many neuroscientists view the brain in this way, because this conception of the brain helps shape the disciplinary structure of the field and helps define levels of neuro­ scientific research.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Seminar on Computational Neuroscience
    Rafael Yuste (Columbia University, New York) Maria Neimark-Geffen (University of Pennsylvania, Programme https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/rmy5/ Philadelphia) Rafael Yuste is Professor of Biological Sciences and https://geffenlab.weebly.com/maria.html Neuroscience at Columbia University. He was born in Maria is interested in the way the brain encodes 16:30 – Welcome and Madrid, where he obtained his MD at the Universidad information about the world around us and how our Autónoma. After a brief period in Sydney Brenner's perception is shaped by our emotional state and El Ministerio de Economía, Industria presentation of Cajal Institute laboratory in Cambridge, UK, he performed Ph.D. studies experience. She combines computational and y Competitividad y la Agencia (Juan José Garrido, Cajal with Larry Katz in Torsten Wiesel’s laboratory at biological approaches to study the mechanisms Estatal de Investigación, en Rockefeller University and was a postdoctoral student of behind dynamic auditory perception, memory and Institute, CSIC, Spain) David Tank at Bell Labs. In 1996 he joined the learning. Maria first got interested in systems colaboración con National Department of Biological Sciences at Columbia University, neuroscience through her undergraduate thesis under Science Foundation (NSF) y where he is Full Professor. In 2005 he became HHMI mentorship of John Hopfield at Princeton University, in National Institutes of Health 16:45 – Rafael Yuste Investigator and co-director of the Kavli Institute for Brain which she explored the mechanics of whisking in rats. Circuits and in 2014 Director of the Neurotechnology She studied texture encoding in the somatosensory (NIH), se complacen en invitarles Center at Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • Connectionism (Artificial Neural Networks) and Dynamical Systems
    COMP 40260 Connectionism (Artificial Neural Networks) and Dynamical Systems doing it numerically..... Connectionism notes: draft 2017 Course overview • 12 weeks, 2hr lecture (Mon, B1.08) plus 2 hr practical; (Monday Afternoon, 2-4, B1.08). • Textbook: Elman, J. E. et al, "Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development", MIT Press, 4th ed, 1999 • Theoretical and hands-on practical course • Course website: http://cogsci.ucd.ie/Connectionism Connectionism notes: draft 2017 Software • Text book uses the free tLearn programme • Stability issues, this software is dead. • We will use some customized software suitable for learning, but not large scale simulations: Basic Prop (basicprop.wordpress.com) • No programming experience presumed Connectionism notes: draft 2017 Connectionism notes: draft 2017 Exercises etc • Evaluation by 3 written exercises and 1 short essay • Due dates are on the webpage • Essay due shortly after exams are over. Connectionism notes: draft 2017 Part 1: Why Connectionism? • Neural Networks (ANNs, RNNs) • (Multi-layered) Perceptrons • Connectionist Networks • Parallel Distributed Processing (PDP) Numerical computational models, with simple processing units, and inter-unit connections. Connectionism notes: draft 2017 The great debate • Innate knowledge vs Inductive learning • Rationalist vs Empiricist • Nativist vs Tabula Rasa (nature/nurture) • Extreme points on a continuum • Interaction of maturational factors (genetically controlled) and the Environment Connectionism notes: draft 2017 Nature versus
    [Show full text]