In some ways, a single cell is more like an entire artificial neural network.

Real neurons have some amazing properties that individual neurons in ANNs do not. It's still unclear how we can exploit those properties to improve AI.

▲

tyromaniac 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I would agree, but I don't think they're that much more interesting than the neurons of many "biologically plausible"-type neuronal nets, which allow for inhibition/exhibition, etc, but are obviously still limited in variation between individuals.

Where I think the really interesting parts missing are those in real neural circuits do, especially since the connections are more heterogenous, and the dynamics are much more fluid and time-dependent, whereas typical at-scale computer neurons obviously operate at fixed time steps, and don't exactly have bursters etc.

I wrote a very large scale distributed simulations for real neurons (straight from imaging datasets) when I was working in a TMS lab, and a longtime side project I always wanted to get going was some kind of pipeline for spitting out neuromechanical/cable-theoretic RTL tailored to specific morphologies and networking them according to their connectomes. I don't even think I would see any performance improvements, it just feels fun.

▲

BrtByte an hour ago | parent [-]

I think the timing aspect is especially interesting here. We tend to focus on making individual artificial neurons more sophisticated, but a lot of the interesting behavior might come from how the whole circuit evolves over time

	▲	tyromaniac an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Absolutely! Just look at the gastric mill circuits that have been studied for decades. Single-digit neuron counts and still has incredibly complex functionality.

▲

barrenko 32 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cell membranes are fascinating in regards to your ANN nod.

▲

fla 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Fascinating.

I totally see the CheY as an intermediary layer that learned how the changes in attractant must affect mechanical activation.

▲

theplumber 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Aren’t there efforts to simulate neurons? (Aka artificial brains)

	▲	dekhn 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		yes, but I think they are egregiously wasteful of resources if your goal is to recapitulate the behavior of real neurons. Instead you can probably build a far simpler model that produces all the behaviors you want without directly simulating a neuron.

▲

echelon 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

A single cell is a living and breathing (respirating) ecosystem.

DNA, the molecule and associated enzymes, is a computer in and of itself. Every dimension - from its hydration to dimensional folding - is a computational manifold.

The cell itself is a system of distributed supercomputers, a machine assembly factory, a dizzying highway and information network, and a universe. Replete with defenses, power factories, intricate and robust signal processing, and self destruct mechanisms.

▲

dekhn 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

DNA is not a computer. It's a passive storage mechanism. When you add the appropriate enzymes though it is turing complete.

	▲	BrtByte an hour ago \| parent [-]
		[flagged]

▲

ctrlkctrls an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Cells are amazing. Even mitochondria are amazing, BUT let's not get carried away with the sci-fi nonsense. You're projecting computer science on to biology because "we're all programmers here" and to the HN crowd (myself included) we like to see the world through comp-sci metaphors. But that's just hyperbolic and inaccurate.