Robin Hanson wrote:
> Paul Hughes wrote:
> >So the question remains what amount of computational
> >machinery is required to replace the current role that a
> >neuron plays? Any takers?
>
> Here's a data point I came across recently:
>
> http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/Publications/annreps/annrep92/schutt.html
>
> It's a 92 paper describing a simulation of one specific
> complex neuron.
Impressive! Using their somewhat simplified simulation of the most
complex neuron in the nervous system (the Purkinje), it still took their
i860 processor almost an hour to run a simulation of a single firing.
How this translates into computational requirements for the typical
neuron remains to be seen, but I think it proves that simulating a single
neuron is not a trivial task.
I argued somewhat incorrectly with Hans Moravec during his peer review of
the paper he published in the 'Transhumanist Journal', that his estimate
of of 10^15 ops/sec for the human brain may need to be adjusted upward to
account for intraneuronal complexity. However, this study would appear
to support my claim.
Paul Hughes
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:37 MDT