Re:Brain Simulation Promised a Decade Ago Hasn't Succeeded
by dTal on Friday July 26, 2019 @05:03AM
(#20533389)
A thermal model sure does predict brain activity from parameters. I can say with high confidence that the brain will have very little activity at 0 degrees C.
Re:Brain Simulation Promised a Decade Ago Hasn't Succeeded
by marmaduke on Friday July 26, 2019 @09:22AM
(#20534564)
That's a narrow range of identifiability with no relevance to the data we collect on a daily basis or the scientific questions being asked (beyond of course that it is a pedantic example)
Re:Brain Simulation Promised a Decade Ago Hasn't Succeeded
by p1esk on Friday July 26, 2019 @12:35PM
(#20536044)
the map is not the territory
Not sure what you mean.
Re:Brain Simulation Promised a Decade Ago Hasn't Succeeded
by marmaduke on Friday July 26, 2019 @02:04PM
(#20536872)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relati...
For example, we have a whole brain model of rest state dynamics that can represent aspects of data (eg graph metrics such as degree) from multiple sclerosis patients, distinctly from healthy controls. Here, the map is the model parameters, and the territory is the patient's actual brain. The map is deemed useful if its structure represents that of the territory.
Re:Brain Simulation Promised a Decade Ago Hasn't Succeeded
by p1esk on Friday July 26, 2019 @02:45PM
(#20537299)
Whether you like it or not, when you say "whole brain simulation" most people will interpret it as a fully functioning model of an entire human brain [1]. If you mean something other than that, you should be more specific (e.g. "a whole brain model of rest state dynamics").
No, it doesn't predict activity from parameters.
> C. elegans, and even that's debatable because it does not model chemical processes
"the map is not the territory". This sort of criticism isn't even scientific