1.
Lloyd Watts, "Visualizing Complexity in the Brain," in D. Fogel and C. Robinson, eds.,
Computational
Intelligence: The Experts Speak
(Piscataway, N.J.: IEEE Press/Wiley, 2003),
http://www.lloydwatts.com/wcci.pdf.
2.
J. G. Taylor, B. Horwitz, and K. J. Friston, "The Global Brain: Imaging
and Modeling,"
Neural Networks
13,
special issue (2000): 827.
3.
Neil A. Busis, "Neurosciences on the Internet," http://www.neuroguide.com; "Neuroscientists Have Better
Tools
on the Brain,"
Bio IT Bulletin
, http://www.bio-it.world.com/news/041503_report2345.html; "Brain
Projects to Reap Dividends for Neurotech Firms,"
Neurotech Reports
,
http://www.neurotechreports.com/pages/brainprojects.html.
4.
Robert A. Freitas Jr.,
Nanomedicine
, vol. 1,
Basic Capabilities
, section 4.8.6, "Noninvasive Neuroelectric
Monitoring" (Georgetown, Tex.: Landes Bioscience, 1999), pp. 115–16,
http://www.nanomedicine.com/NMI/4.8.6.htm.
5.
Chapter 3
analyzed this issue; see the section "The Computational Capacity of the Human Brain."
6.
Speech-recognition research and development, Kurzweil Applied Intelligence, which I founded in 1982, now
part of ScanSoft (formerly Kurzweil Computer Products).
7.
Lloyd Watts, U.S.
Patent Application, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 20030095667, May 22, 2003,
"Computation of Multi-sensor Time Delays." Abstract: "Determining a time delay between a first signal
received at a first sensor and a second signal received at a second sensor is described. The first signal is
analyzed to derive a plurality of first signal channels at different frequencies and the
second signal is analyzed
to derive a plurality of second signal channels at different frequencies. A first feature is detected that occurs at
a first time in one of the first signal channels. A second feature is detected that occurs at a second time in one
of the second signal channels. The first feature is matched with the second feature
and the first time is
compared to the second time to determine the time delay." See also Nabil H. Farhat, U.S. Patent Application
20040073415, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, April 15, 2004, "Dynamical Brain Model for Use in Data
Processing Applications."
8.
I estimate the compressed genome at about thirty to one hundred million bytes (see note 57 for chapter 2); this
is smaller than the object code for Microsoft Word and much smaller than the source code. See Word 2003
system requirements, October 20, 2003, http://www.microsoft.com/office/word/prodinfo/sysreq.mspx.
9.
Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics.
10.
See note 57 in chapter 2 for an analysis of the information content
in the genome, which I estimate to be 30 to
100 million bytes, therefore less than 10
9
bits. See the section "Human Memory Capacity" in chapter 3 (p. 126)
for my analysis of the information in a human brain, estimated at 10
18
bits.
11.
Marie Gustafsson and Christian Balkenius, "Using Semantic Web Techniques
for Validation of Cognitive
Models against Neuroscientific Data," AILS04 Workshop, SAIS/SSLS Workshop (Swedish Artificial
Intelligence Society; Swedish Society for Learning Systems), April 15–16, 2004, Lund, Sweden,
www.lucs.lu.se/People/Christian.Balkenius/PDF/Gustafsson.Balkenius.2004.pdf.
12.
See discussion in chapter 3. In one useful reference, when modeling neuron by neuron, Tomaso Poggio and
Christof Koch describe the neuron as similar to a chip with thousands of logical gates. See T. Poggio and C.
Koch, "Synapses
That Compute Motion,"
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: