No (to answer question far down near the end of this), it would not
help much. It would be about like trying to construct an artificial
New York City based on the traffic flow seen from the helicopter
reporting traffic flow for radio or TV reports.
F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
New York Neuropsychology Group
In <6opg77$4udg$1 at newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com> "jjj"
<jaceklk at hotmail.com> writes:
>>Hi all,
>>I just read an article in Science magazine about that monkey having a
scan
>of her brain with fNMR (dynamic, real time magnetic resonance) and I
had
>that thought: I think that researchers struggle to create a
human-like,
>artificial brain. They try to teach that brain on the input from
environment
>only, but how about if you can have a human fNMR scan with all
different
>thoughts as an additional input. You can create easily a vast amount
of data
>for a artificial neural net!
>Another words, you would input both visual/auditory input (same as
that real
>brain receives) AND the blood flow in biological neural network (fNMR
scan).
>Goal wold be to recreate a net which would behave the same way as the
real
>brain.
>Advantage would be that you can easily test the new artificial brain
if both
>the fNMR of real brain and the activity in artificial neural net are
the
>same. Also, I'm not sure but I feel that additional,easily acquired
info,
>would help in creating the net since it give more information about
the
>hidden nodes/layers of the neural net.
>What do you think? Would that help a little in ultimate goal? :)
>(I realize that the real NN are very complex and that simulating that
vast
>number of complex neurons is not possible today.)
>>Jacek
>
