Some more about Brain Research and U-CEP / Free Will

Events, complex events, complex event processing

Satla Zone's experiment - proud of our brain?

Postby rainer93138 » Mon Jan 30, 2012 4:56 am

Thanks to Opher Etzion who shared the experiment of Satla Zone in Facebook, we have actually seen a nice experiment with a lot of probands and their comments (actually the most I cannot read because Hebrew does not work in my case):
Image
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... =1&theater

The most, who watched the photo, seem to be proud that their brain works so well. We can read the text just as fast as it would be written correctly. Our lazy brain CEP engine - what our brain actually is in comparison with a computer based CEP engine - gets its performance by the six layered cortex and its kind of event processing where stored complex patterns or already processed patterns are not processed once more but are only correlated with currently inflying events or signals from senses - perhaps or probably as we assume. (As we know, we do not know much about the human brain or e.g. where the memory sits or how the brain keeps or stores information respectively event patterns over decades (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1316&hilit=npas4#p1316 or an Americain project http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 81986.html which will investigate similar things as the European Human Brain Project.)

It should not be a problem for quick and frequent readers who are trained only to read and see patterns. Also from a musician, e.g. from a sax player or jazz pianist, we hear tones she has left or not played, and such tones are actually missing and are automatically "added" by the brain. The same is true with watching or "economically" sensing our environment and constructing our specific reality based on some basic patterns. The older the more we do so, it's actually a pity, that we see more and more the same patterns, a bit boring maybe ... Therefore it is great to have children and grandchildren, young dogs and cats and to observe how they experience the world 8-) . Perhaps our project proposal BioMedCEP would show some more someday, enhancing senses and adding new senses and see a new reality viewtopic.php?f=13&t=316&start=50#p1330.

We should not simply be proud on our brain power, but also a bit skeptic. What we have read is the result of conditioning as e.g. the formerly mentioned Deepak Chopra is saying viewtopic.php?f=13&t=261&p=1216&hilit=chopra#p1216, and others as well: context, culture, education, life experiences, history, how (and the way) we were educated or trained in kindergarten, school, university, etc. (mostly memorizing again and again in our school system). It might even be a more or less intentionally tricky fraud, typically used in - in the future CEP-based - neuromarketing, or false perception or illusion or augmented reality or so. We should see it as it is - that's the challenge: an actually senseless alliteration of signs we have only interpreted. Some years ago it was good to have such a brain in order to survive, to react on dangerous patterns fast enough, but today we do not need such a brain anymore, or we are more and more fooled if we live in one of the "developed countries":
Image
Source: http://www.boerse-online.de, 31 Jan 2012
Today's event processing - we feel alarmed more and more, although there is no tiger behind us who wants to eat us, perhaps our money or actually a number on our bank account because there is actually no physical money at all, only fiat-money :cry: (see also viewtopic.php?f=13&t=252&start=20#p1317 or viewtopic.php?f=13&t=268&p=1168&hilit=switch+off+event+channels#p1168)
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

Current Brain/Mind projects - Positioning of BioMedCEP

Postby rainer93138 » Sat Feb 04, 2012 1:01 am

What is the difference between Human Brain Project, Connectome project, Whole Brain Emulation, Substrate-Independent Minds, IBM's Dharmendra Modha Cognitive computing?

This an interesting podcast with Randal Koene from Halcyon in Stanford/California, which discusses some answers to the question above, also why actually do we do such things like Whole Brain Emulation, Uploading minds, Substrate-Independent Minds, Simulating the human brain, etc.:

http://www.singularityweblog.com/randal ... e-fiction/
http://www.carboncopies.org/substrate-independent-minds

See also Cognitive Computing / DARPA SyNAPSE project
http://www2.dac.com/events/videoarchive ... er=keynote

See also Henry Markram's team Blue Brain/Human Brain Project
http://www.kurzweilai.net/henry-markram ... sive-years
There was then a nice controversial discussion:
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastruct ... am-384096/
http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/semi ... liff-notes
http://technology-report.com/2009/11/ne ... is-a-hoax/

See also Karl-Heinz Meier's team BrainScaleS
https://brainscales.kip.uni-heidelberg. ... index.html

See also Human Connectome Project
http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/
See also the Connectome TEDtalk from MIT/Sebastian Seung, July 2010
http://www.ted.com/talks/sebastian_seung.html

See also Memory-Prediction Framework of Jeff Hawkins team
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&start=20#p1370

In our teachings about U-CEP viewtopic.php?f=13&t=273 and viewtopic.php?f=13&t=276 we could give this to the student teams and let them work out and present the different foci. And then let's position BioMedCEP respectively our uCepCortex project proposals.

See also a bit outdated in the meantime this comparison overview http://synapticlink.org/BrainProjectCom ... htm?mid=54

We can use this positioning in our "State-of-the-Art" and "What is Beyond" paragraphs 1.x of the BioMedCEP or uCepCortex project proposal viewtopic.php?f=13&t=316.
Last edited by rainer93138 on Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:44 pm, edited 10 times in total.
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

Decode thoughts and let them speak from a computer or robot

Postby rainer93138 » Sat Feb 04, 2012 1:16 am

Researchers at University of California in Berkeley are working on making a thought speak (BTW: Berkeley also announced the first "event adapters" for living cells in 2010 viewtopic.php?f=13&t=268). This is related to what John-Dylan Haynes group at MPI Leizig is investigating as well: Mind reading viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1046&hilit=Haynes#p1046. The researchers have reconstructed what people have heard - and solely on the basis of their brain waves. This might become a technology for locked-in patients or similar.
As mentioned above in this thread, we can also combine this with our U-CEP based approach or the BioMedCEP project and control or manage business or other (bio) processes by brain waves, e.g. viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&start=10#p1275, viewtopic.php?f=13&t=308, etc.

More:
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info ... io.1001251
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mens ... 62,00.html
http://www.kurzweilai.net/scientists-de ... dium=email
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

Jeff Hawkins and Neuro Bio Inspired Systems

Postby rainer93138 » Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:16 am

This is what Jeff Hawkins understands with "Neuro Bio Inspired Systems (NBIS)" and what I have refered to in some of the threads in this forum (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=316&p=1330&hilit=jeff+hawkins#p1330 or viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1197&hilit=jeff+hawkins#p1197 or viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1145&hilit=jeff+hawkins#p1145):

http://www.beckman.illinois.edu/gallery ... tFPl7XLnTA

Jeff Hawkins is the inventor of handheld computers/devices like PalmPilot. At present his team at Numenta http://www.numenta.com/ and at the Redwood Neuroscience Institute http://www.rni.org/history.html works two major algorithmic frameworks: Hierarchical Temporal Memory and Fixed-sparsity Distributed Representations. The frameworks can find patterns in noisy data, model the latent causes, and make predictions about what patterns will come next. This fits perfectly to our uCepCortex or BioMedCEP project proposal viewtopic.php?f=13&t=316&start=50#p1330 .

The "memory-prediction framework" as described in his book On intelligence, 2004 is a theory how the brain works. His unified theory of the brain argues that the key to the brain and intelligence is the ability to make predictions about the world by seeing patterns. He argues that attempts to create an artificial intelligence by simply programming a computer to do what a brain does are flawed and that to actually make an intelligent computer, we simply need to teach it to find and use patterns, not to attempt any specific tasks. Through this method, he thinks we can build intelligent machines, helping us do all sorts of useful tasks that current computers cannot achieve. He further argues that this memory-prediction system as implemented by the brain's cortex is the basis of human intelligence.
Last edited by rainer93138 on Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

Computer programs that think like humans?

Postby rainer93138 » Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:06 am

Computer programs that think like humans? - Computer programs that ace IQ tests?

In this project http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 021312.php of the Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, "intelligence" is tested as an IQ according to the ability of the computer or software "to detect patterns" (see also the problem with patterns and intelligence viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&start=20#p1360). It's claimed that IQ tests are based on two types of problems: progressive matrices, which test the ability to see patterns in pictures, and number sequences, which test the ability to see patterns in numbers. That is actually not correct (and perhaps a bit a misinterpretation of the press; see e.g. http://psychology.about.com/od/psycholo ... istory.htm):
Image
Alfred Binet was a French psychologist who developed the first IQ test. His test provided the basis for the modern IQ tests used today. However, Binet himself did not believe that his psychometric instruments could be used to measure a single, permanent and inborn level of intelligence. Binet stressed the limitations of the test, suggesting that intelligence is far too broad a concept to quantify with a single number. Instead, he insisted that intelligence is influenced by a number of factors, changes over time and can only be compared among children with similar backgrounds... An adapted test, first published in 1916, was called the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and soon became the standard intelligence test used in the U.S.... The Stanford-Binet intelligence test used a single number, known as the intelligence quotient (or IQ), to represent an individual's score on the test. This score was calculated by dividing the test taker's mental age by their chronological age, and then multiplying this number by 100. For example, a child with a mental age of 12 and a chronological age of 10 would have an IQ of 120 (12 /10 x 100). The Stanford-Binet remains a popular assessment tool today, despite going through a number of revisions over the years since its inception. ... Much like Binet, Wechsler believed that intelligence involved a number of different mental abilities, describing intelligence as, "the global capacity of a person to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment" (1939). Dissatisfied with the limitations of the Stanford-Binet, he published his new intelligence test known as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) in 1955..."

There is no standard definition of what exactly constitutes "intelligence". Some researchers have suggested that intelligence is a single, general ability, while other believe that intelligence encompasses a range of aptitudes, skills and talents.

In contrast to that Jeff Hawkins (On Intelligence, 2004) defined intelligence as the "ability to predict" what would be a good addition to the definition, IMO. Would the following mean "prediction" already?

"1, 2, …, what comes next? Most people would say 3, but it could also be a repeating sequence like 1, 2, 1 or a doubling sequence like 1, 2, 4. Neither of these alternatives is more mathematically correct than the others. What it comes down to is that most people have learned the 1-2-3 pattern."

Allegedly they have integrated a mathematical model that models an allegedly "human-like problem solving... Our programmes are beating the conventional math programmes because we are combining mathematics and psychology. Our method can potentially be used to identify patterns in any data with a psychological component, such as financial data. But it is not as good at finding patterns in more science-type data, such as weather data, since then the human psyche is not involved... we can then use to design computer programmes for people who want to practice their problem solving ability..."

So far I have not seen the original scientific background behind the project, but I doubt that such programs do "human-like problem solving" and test intelligence at all - in the sense of U-CEP to react on patterns by actions or processes adequately and to evaluate the right patterns in the right context(s) or hierarchies of contexts, etc. (e.g. viewtopic.php?f=13&t=252&start=20#p1317).

More: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 021312.php

With our submission to FET'11 viewtopic.php?f=13&t=294 we wanted to demonstrate in an introducing practical experiment with the audience how limited our brain actually is as an Event Processing "tool". For that we used another tool "Brain Workshop" for this demonstration http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/. This is the reason why we'll enhance the humans’ abilities in different domains based on U-CEP.
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

Thought-controlled computing

Postby rainer93138 » Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:16 am

Development of a cross-platform applications (including iOS and Android) using a revolutionary new human-computer interface

Now we already have start-ups in this field:
http://interaxon.ca/

Although we actually do not know what a thought is so far viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1312&hilit=thought+threshold#p1312, viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1244&hilit=thought+threshold#p1244. We work on this in our project proposal uCepCortex or BioMedCEP viewtopic.php?f=13&t=316&p=1330&hilit=NOAT#p1330.

If you have all these skills mentioned there and you are not older than 20 or 30 years normally ;) , you should apply (I would not have the half of them, I fear, and I'm older than 30+ anyway...)
http://interaxon.ca/blog/2012/01/interaxon-is-hiring/

I remember my trip with an Austrian delegation to Cananda in 2003, a excellent country for start ups:
http://www.citt-online.com/index.php?id ... a&id4=more
http://www.citt-online.com/downloads/Canada1.pdf
http://www.citt-online.com/downloads/Canada2.pdf

It's a bit related to the other recent article about Microsoft's co-founder Paul Allen's Brain Institute and his new investment:
Billionaire Paul Allen Pours $500 Million Into Quest To Find The Essence Of Humanity In The Brain
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherp ... -us-human/

where is mentioned that it is relatively easy to teach students to program a computer within some years, but we are not able to understand the human brain in our whole lifetime so far. Christof Koch from CalTech joined as the Institute’s Chief Scientific Officer. Perhaps we make progress now because this decade should be the decade of the Mind viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&p=1073#p1073.
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am


carboncopies - open group at facebook

Postby rainer93138 » Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:13 am

There are interesting threads in this open group - about Substrate Independent Mind (SIM), Whole Brain Emulation (WBE), Mind Uploading and our brain or HET related project ideas:
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/ ... boncopies/
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

Device That's Trying to Read Your Thoughts

Postby rainer93138 » Sat Apr 07, 2012 4:26 am

Now there are first start-ups in the field of Mind Reading and Complex Event Patterns. NeuroVigil plans a study in large populations of patients with ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases and whether a human can use his mind to create a consistent and repeatable pattern that a computer can translate into a word or letter or a command for a computer, etc.

We could try to cooperate and use it with our uCepCortex project idea:
http://www.neurovigil.com/ibrain/
http://www.neurovigil.com/partnerships/
http://www.neurovigil.com/
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

‘Neural fingerprints’ of memory associations allow ‘mind r..

Postby rainer93138 » Wed Jul 11, 2012 1:05 am

‘Neural fingerprints’ of memory associations allow ‘mind reading’

A new study by University of Pennsylvania and Thomas Jefferson University scientists brings this work one step closer to actual mind reading by using brain recordings to infer the way people organize associations between words in their memories.

http://www.kurzweilai.net/neural-finger ... dium=email

The techniques the researchers developed in this study could also be adapted to analyze many different ways of mentally organizing studied information.

“In addition to looking at memories organized by time, as in our previous study, or by meaning, as in our current study, one could use our technique to identify neural signatures of how individuals organize learned information according to appearance, size, texture, sound, taste, location or any other measurable property,” Manning said.

“Spontaneous verbal recall is a form of memory that is both pervasive in our lives and unique to the human species,” Kahana said. “Yet, this aspect of human memory is the least well understood in terms of brain mechanisms. Our data show a direct correspondence between patterns of brain activity and the meanings of individual words and show how this neural representation of meaning predicts the way in which one item cues another during spontaneous recall.

“Given the critical role of language in human thought and communication, identifying a neural representation that reflects the meanings of words as they are spontaneously recalled brings us one step closer to the elusive goal of mapping thoughts in the human brain.”

Manning, J. R., Sperling, M. R., Sharan, A., Rosenberg, E. A., and Kahana, M. J. Spontaneously reactivated patterns in frontal and temporal lobe predict semantic clustering during memory search, Journal of Neuroscience, 2012, DOI: 10.1523/​JNEUROSCI.5321-11.2012

In connection with our uCepCortex project viewtopic.php?f=13&t=319 I'm studying some models of Antonio Damasio's team about CDZ, etc. http://willcov.com/bio-consciousness/si ... 0Zones.htm regarding memorizing, thinking and consciousness http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant%C3%B3nio_Dam%C3%A1sio I have not yet finished, but it seems that we could transfer these models into our exocortex software architecture, class diagrams with accordant attributes, methods, associations, as we have sketched viewtopic.php?f=13&t=257&start=10#p1312
Last edited by rainer93138 on Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
rainer93138
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:26 am

PreviousNext

Return to Complex Event Processing Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron