Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Human Brain Project

humanbrainproject.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: The Human Brain Project

#31

Post by pbw »

neuroguy wrote: post #9
streptomycin wrote: post #8

Why start with the human brain? Why not do something simpler first? We can't even simulate the C. elegans brain yet http://lesswrong.com/lw/88g/whole_brain_emulation_looking_at... and that is ridiculously simpler than the human brain.

From the FAQ - Why not begin with simple organisms like C.elegans? There are two problems here. The first is feasibility; the second is the relevance of our results. Feasibility. Neuroscientists have mapped all of C.elegans’ 300 or so neurons. However, enormous amounts of key data needed are still missing. For instance we do not have enough data on the physiology and pharmacology of C. Elegans neurons and synapses. A…

So sure there are low-level details that must be understood for any brain, but come on, 300 vs. 100B?

Once the big projects have cracked the low-level details, someone will figure out C. elegans. Until we have some smaller organisms emulated, don't expect to have a conversation with their emulated human brain, I just can't see that happening out of order.

Re: The Human Brain Project

#32

Post by modeless »

furbo wrote: post #4

If that simulation would be conscious, wouldn't it be just as bad (if not worse) as performing experiments on animals ? and if it wouldn't be conscious, wouldn't it conflict with the beliefs of most scientists on the origin of consciousness ?

A digital computer simulation would be fundamentally different from a brain. It could be replicated, backed up, and restored with perfect fidelity. In my view that completely changes the ethics of experimentation.

Re: The Human Brain Project

#33

Post by apdavison »

jacquesm wrote: post #17
[deleted] wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Yes, but one day they will have - hopefully - results. And a commitment to publish in open access journals should have been part and parcel of a funding round like this. A billion is not exactly pocket change.

Henry Markram, the coordinator of the Human Brain Project, is also one of the founders of Frontiers (http://frontiersin.org), a scientist-led, open-access publisher, so I think it's fair to say there is already a strong commitment to open access publishing within the project.

Re: The Human Brain Project

#34

Post by apdavison »

devopstom wrote: post #3

It'd be interesting if that page listed jobs at partner organisations.. I'd love to be involved with a project like that, but it's difficult to get involved.

I would suggest checking back after the summer, which is when the project should actually start.

Also note, "The HBP has allocated a large proportion of its funding to what we call Competitive Calls. The HBP Competitive Calls Programme will allow researchers from outside the HBP Consortium to propose research and applications development projects using the HBP platforms and to receive funding from the HBP. Proposals will be evaluated by peer reviewers from outside the Consortium. We expect to see many proposals for research and approaches that the current Consortium has never considered"

and

"From year 3 onwards the HBP will fund a large number of HBP Ph.D studentships and post-doctoral fellowships."

(my understanding is that these are in addition to any postdocs recruited by partner organizations using their individual funding for the project).

Re: The Human Brain Project

#35

Post by vannevar »

dalai wrote: post #26
vannevar wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. To simulate the effects of a drug, you would need to simulate not only the neurons, but the circulatory system, the blood-brain barrier, perhaps even the immune system, and all of their respective interactions . Give the state of our knowledge, a massive publicly-funded project seems premature, like setting out to do the moon landing in 1870.

I don't know about that part of the project, but you could for example simulate the effect of the local interaction between a molecule and a neuron. The mechanisms to put the molecule there could be investigated separately. > Give the state of our knowledge, a massive publicly-funded project seems premature One billion might sound like bucket loads of money, but it is not. There are close to 90 institutions involved…

If this is really just an umbrella term for a bunch of independent research, that's different. The problem with a big project organization is that the administrative overhead involved in coordinating all of those 90 institutions will eat up valuable time and research dollars. And with no clear roadmap to guide priorities, that overhead won't provide any benefit. There's too much basic research left to be done before people start trying to coordinate on building ambitious 'platforms'. Better to simply fund a broad range of independent research and see what emerges.

Re: The Human Brain Project

#36

Post by apdavison »

r_m_adler wrote: post #15

This sounds really interesting - I would definitely apply to work on such a thing. But I am scared away by the science career path. So optimistically you get to develop some neuro simulation code, maybe get a couple of papers out it. What do you do then? Who in industry hires people who worked on this kind of stuff? I'm not trying to be pessimistic - if I figure out a good idea then I'll go for it and apply.

I know several people who have done PhDs in neural simulation and then gone on to work in industry (e.g. banking, IT consultancy).

I've also come across a couple of startups building on brain-inspired computing. The only one that comes to mind at the moment is Brain Corporation in San Diego http://www.braincorporation.com

Re: The Human Brain Project

#37

Post by apdavison »

a-priori wrote: post #19
[deleted] wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Google Scholar lists about 855 papers mentioning the term "blue brain project", the Human Brain Project's predecessor: http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=%22blue+brain+project%22&... And even though the project has just launched, there are already about 1,980 papers mentioning the term "human brain project": http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=%22human+brain+project%22...

The "Human Brain Project" was also an NIH funding initiative in the 1990s, which was hugely influential in kickstarting the field of neuroinformatics (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroinformatics)

Re: The Human Brain Project

#38

Post by upquark »

neuroguy wrote: post #9
streptomycin wrote: post #8

Why start with the human brain? Why not do something simpler first? We can't even simulate the C. elegans brain yet http://lesswrong.com/lw/88g/whole_brain_emulation_looking_at... and that is ridiculously simpler than the human brain.

From the FAQ - Why not begin with simple organisms like C.elegans? There are two problems here. The first is feasibility; the second is the relevance of our results. Feasibility. Neuroscientists have mapped all of C.elegans’ 300 or so neurons. However, enormous amounts of key data needed are still missing. For instance we do not have enough data on the physiology and pharmacology of C. Elegans neurons and synapses. A…

I'm not a neuroscientist and may be missing something, but on the surface this seems like a pretty poor argument: citing feasibility as a justification for not going with the (overwhelmingly) simpler organisms first, and going after humans with several orders of magnitude more complex brains. If I were to guess, I'd say that building the unified model of the simplest organisms would be tremendously relevant in helping to model higher-level organisms including humans.

Re: The Human Brain Project

#39

Post by jacquesm »

dalai wrote: post #27
jacquesm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but one day they will have - hopefully - results. And a commitment to publish in open access journals should have been part and parcel of a funding round like this. A billion is not exactly pocket change.

The EU already encourages open access for FP7 (the current funding programme) and it will become even better for the new one called Horizon2020 starting next year. http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/07/european-commission-emb...

Encouraging is not mandating though. But they're definitely on the right path, now they need to see it through.

Re: The Human Brain Project

#40

Post by jacquesm »

pbw wrote: post #31
neuroguy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the FAQ - Why not begin with simple organisms like C.elegans? There are two problems here. The first is feasibility; the second is the relevance of our results. Feasibility. Neuroscientists have mapped all of C.elegans’ 300 or so neurons. However, enormous amounts of key data needed are still missing. For instance we do not have enough data on the physiology and pharmacology of C. Elegans neurons and synapses. A…

So sure there are low-level details that must be understood for any brain, but come on, 300 vs. 100B? Once the big projects have cracked the low-level details, someone will figure out C. elegans. Until we have some smaller organisms emulated, don't expect to have a conversation with their emulated human brain, I just can't see that happening out of order.

It's simple, simulating C. elegans will not net you a billion in funding. It's not sexy enough.
Post reply on HN