News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mattkrause on Thursday March 14, 2019 @03:42PM (#19392823)
A lot of bio stuff now generates huge amounts of data and needs computational skills to collect and interpret. My undergrad degree was in CS and I still split my time between training animals and training models (plus writing and, today, RAID-babysitting).

We get about 1 Gb/min of neurophysiological data (x4-6 hours/day) and I'm hoping to scale that up quite a bit soon. People doing microscopy also generate giant datasets, as do the sequencing folks.

Me, specifically? A labmate showed me and said "It's cool...and a timesink."

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by jcims on Thursday March 14, 2019 @10:53PM (#19396025)
Just wanted to thank you for wading in here sand sharing your perspective.
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mattkrause on Thursday March 14, 2019 @11:14PM (#19396123)
You're welcome! Random interesting stuff is what makes the internet worth keeping around, after all :-)
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by HNLurker2 on Friday March 15, 2019 @01:24AM (#19396830)
Many neuroscientist turn to teaching mindfulness (e.g Sam Harris) because in their spiritual journey and academic neuroscientist journey they ask : Who am I?

What do you think about this? Who is the I? Where can I find it? Is it just mysticism?

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mrep on Thursday March 14, 2019 @07:01PM (#19394762)
Ever read the book "On Intelligence" by Jeff Hawkins and if so, what are you thoughts on it? I've read that and ray kurzweil's books and On Intelligence was my favorite and got me super interested in AI but I haven't done much with it so I'm curious what someone who has a PhD in neuroscience thinks of it.
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by beefcafe on Thursday March 14, 2019 @07:44PM (#19395064)
Also “How to Build a Brain” by Chris Eliasmith. Interesting theories on how neurons represent functions and then build into a greater whole. I’m not a neuroscientist but my intuition says he might be getting closer to a solid mid-level (above the level of ion channels) understanding of brain function.
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mattkrause on Thursday March 14, 2019 @11:16PM (#19396132)
I haven't, though it's been on my list for a while.

I'm collaborating with a woman who has also been working with him to model some of our data with NENGO, so I should really get around to that sooner rather than later.

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by loamseed on Thursday March 14, 2019 @04:48PM (#19393542)
Are there publicly available repositories of this kind of data? Where?

What are the best modern methods to analyze them?

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mattkrause on Thursday March 14, 2019 @05:46PM (#19394127)
Yup. The neuroimaging folks are really good about sharing data. If you want to look at MRI/MEG/EEG data, https://openneuro.org might be a good place to start.

CRCNS (https://crcns.org/data-sets) has some neurophysiology data (i.e., from implanted or inserted electrodes). This sort of data is shared a little less often, in part because it's often acquired and stored in weird, homebrew formats, though that's slowly changing.

ModelDB (https://senselab.med.yale.edu/ModelDB/) has a large collection of computational models. These are mostly biophysical models, though there's some other stuff in there too.

Depending on what you're looking for, there are other more specialized repositories. NDCT (https://data-archive.nimh.nih.gov/ndct) has mental-health related clinical trial data, though you'll have to do some paperwork if you want subject-level data, which is fairly common for clinical data. MIT has a collection of eye movement data sets: http://saliency.mit.edu/datasets.html

As for the best methods, this comment box is far too small to contain all my thoughts on that :-) It depends on your question and experiment. Sometimes, all you really need is a t-test (or the randomized version), but that requires getting the experiment just right. Other times, you might need a morass of signal processing and dimensionality reduction, fed into some giant multi-level Bayesian model in a vain attempt controls for all the stuff you neglected when you designed the damn experiment. Happy to send you some pointers if you have something specific in mind though!

Physics has historically had a huge leg up on the other sciences because they had real models that made testable, quantitative predictions. We're finally starting to learn enough about the brain that we can do this for neural data too, and I'm really excited about that!

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by loamseed on Saturday March 16, 2019 @07:52PM (#19411204)
Thank you for this wealth of information!

I will definitely look through, and after digging around a bit I'd love to get some pointers. I have been curious about this for a long time, but uncertain where to look, so this is very exciting. Thank you again :)

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by codekilla on Thursday March 14, 2019 @04:39PM (#19393446)
what sorts of tools are you using to deal with this data?
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mattkrause on Thursday March 14, 2019 @05:21PM (#19393891)
It's a hodgepodge.

Mostly Matlab, Python, and R, with a few things that have tight time/memory requirements in C++. Matlab was really popular in neuroscience for a very long time, so we still have a lot of code in m-files, but most labs are moving towards Python (and a few towards R).

The code quality varies a lot. Some of our "core" stuff is great, but there's also a lot of stuff that was written quickly and meant to be run once ("let's just try it"), which is cold comfort when you find it years later.

People also come in with varying levels of programming skill. I'm going to try to do actual code reviews with the undergrads this summer to see if we can't make our stuff a little less embarrassing.

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by codekilla on Thursday March 14, 2019 @07:18PM (#19394884)
I can't reply to your last comment...but yes..anything dealing with time series it's easily the best in the world. In a past life long ago I worked in finance and heard about it then. Recently, I was thinking about simulations and how to maybe deal with and analyze the timeseries data and I thought about it. Apparently, NASA is experimenting with it at their Ames Frontier Development Lab, astrophysics data is huge. Anyway, I am just kicking the tires at this point and trying to find ways to implement and play around with it a bit. If you or anyone you know develops an interest, feel free to drop me a line. grantroy _@_ caltech dot edu
Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by codekilla on Thursday March 14, 2019 @06:18PM (#19394420)
I'm interested in using kdb+/q for applications dealing with large scale scientific data. Do you think there would be much interest in the neuroscience community?

I'll add, I work in a lab and have seen the stuff of nightmares myself.

Re:DeepMind and Google: the battle to control artificial int... by mattkrause on Thursday March 14, 2019 @07:08PM (#19394815)
Possibly! I've not played with the time series databases much. Most of our queries would be something like "give me signals from channels A-C that are +/- 1 second from all events of type X." If it would help with something like that, it'd be great.