Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!yale!cs.yale.edu!zador-anthony
From: zador-anthony@CS.YALE.EDU (anthony zador)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets
Subject: What has NN research taught us about the brain?
Message-ID: <9096@cs.yale.edu>
Date: 19 Dec 89 18:20:51 GMT
Sender: news@cs.yale.edu
Reply-To: zador-anthony@CS.YALE.EDU (anthony zador)
Distribution: comp.ai.neural-nets
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept, New Haven CT  06520-2158
Lines: 24

As a grad student in neuroscience studying neural nets, I was recently asked
to lead a discussion for a small seminar in the Physiology dept here to address
the question:
	 What has NN research taught us about the brain?

The seminar was organized by a professor here who studies the simultaneous activity of
some large fraction of the neurons of Aplysia. He feels that even Aplysia may
be way too complicated to understand. He wonders how we can hope to understand
how the 10^12 neurons of the brain do their stuff when even the 10^3 neurons of
Aplysia are a problem. 

In any case, I had to single out some paper in the field of neural nets to
present. The idea was to convince this group of sceptics that NNets offer something
to biological understanding. 

I wont tell what i chose. Rather, i'd be interested in hearing if anyone has 
any ideas. Note that since the audience consisted of experimental scientists,
the goal was to find a paper that presented a *testable* (or better, tested) 
hypothesis or theory, and one that they couldnt have come up with themselves.

Any ideas???


Tony Zador