[Neuroscience] Web page about a new neural network theory

konstantin kouzovnikov via neur-sci%40net.bio.net (by myukhome from hotmail.com)
Tue Feb 27 15:53:53 EST 2007

>I've made a little web page about some ideas I had a while back:

Mick, hi: I found your materials as interesting as laconic. Thanks for the 
opportunity to become familiar.

I am making a very inconsistent attempt to understand the computational 
stuff as, for a very good reason, such models do help when attempting to 
piece several brain regions together, as in information processing modeling 
in norm and pathology. So, intuitively, I like your concept as it is based 
on - what you seem to ID as the main activity of a neuron - monitoring of 
what's happening around, everywhere. I am not sure I understood it right, 
but in the case I did it is the same reason I liked Ken's ideas, if you 
bothered following some recent exchanges here. Perhaps a long one, but there 
is a connection between what the two of you are saying.

If you are not busy, could you consider answering the following questions:

1. Would you agree that if one makes a statement similar to yours as in "to 
continuously attempt to learn to predict the activities of other neurons but 
based on different inputs", we really are talking about one of the two main 
forms of neuronal activity with one as being a part of a specific "message 
delivery", and the other of doing exactly what you have described, i.e. 
"just being a part of the crowd"? Or you saying that this is all in one? The 
other way to describe my question: I am attempting to interpret what I am 
lately reading about which is the paradigm of Intrinsic Brain Activity, but 
was having a problem to ID its implications on the view about how neurons 
act. Am I clear here? (I am way out of my wits here). There must be a 
mechanism allowing each neuron to "respond" to every other one.
2. are you familiar with a take on networks described as "small-world, but 
not scale-free network"? would you be able to provide a "customized" version 
of your theory for such networks, especially if one consists of a specific 
number of nodes? In other words, how would an HTM approach differ from 
yours, the ILM? in relation to a "small-world, but not scale free, network"?
3. would you agree with me that the ILM approach would better explain some 
seemingly bizarre clinical phenomena when a part of a drastically truncated 
and isolated nervous system would spontaneously produce rather organized 
(although not exactly responsive to external stimuli) action? I am referring 
to, say, a very recent reference of a cat with practically separated from 
the "head brain" spine still walking; would you agree that the HTM approach 
would require the cat not to be able to be spontaneously active, while the 
ILM approach would demand freed spontaneity, freed from the connections 


Exclusive Ed Byrne daily comedy clips on MSN Video 

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net