
Biological networks utilize similar algorithms as engineered counterparts - zenonian
http://www.salk.edu/news-release/internet-brain-alike-think/
======
dopu
Rather interestingly, you see this sort of mirroring in other areas of
neuroscience as well. One example is the simple cell receptive fields in the
visual cortex [0]. If you take a natural image, slice it up into a bunch of
small patches, and run independent components analysis (ICA) on them [1], you
end up with patches that look a lot like simple cell receptive fields,
implying that the visual system uses something very similar to ICA to process
information.

In the same way, you can run ICA on human speech, and what you get back are
gammatone filters, [2] which are commonly used to model the auditory system!

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_cell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_cell)
[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_component_analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_component_analysis)
[2]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gammatone_filter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gammatone_filter)

------
dekhn
I think you got the headline backwards- engineered systems use system
algorithms to biological networks. Since after all, those biological systems
have been doing these sorts of things, _without being engineered_.

That we rediscover biological mechanisms present in our own designs, we should
not be surprised.

~~~
amelius
I think that the phrase "utilize similar" does not imply an order.

Anyway, I'm curious what would be the engineering counterpart of caffeine :)

~~~
dekhn
caffeine is the engineering counterpart of caffeine.

------
100ideas
Apropos the 2010 PNAS article "Comparing genomes to computer operating systems
in terms of the topology and evolution of their regulatory control networks"

Abstract: "The genome has often been called the operating system (OS) for a
living organism. A computer OS is described by a regulatory control network
termed the call graph, which is analogous to the transcriptional regulatory
network in a cell. To apply our firsthand knowledge of the architecture of
software systems to understand cellular design principles, we present a
comparison between the transcriptional regulatory network of a well-studied
bacterium (Escherichia coli) and the call graph of a canonical OS (Linux) in
terms of topology and evolution. We show that both networks have a
fundamentally hierarchical layout, but there is a key difference: The
transcriptional regulatory network possesses a few global regulators at the
top and many targets at the bottom; conversely, the call graph has many
regulators controlling a small set of generic functions."

dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914771107
[https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1e5a/bf57c88ad060046c5b2adc...](https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1e5a/bf57c88ad060046c5b2adcc362fe908090a8.pdf)

------
lutusp
(mystified expression) ... translation: "Biological networks use algorithms
similar to engineered counterparts". But as another correspondent has pointed
out, it's really the other way around.

~~~
theoh
But similarity is a symmetric thing, like the relation "close to". So X is
similar to Y implies Y is similar to X. And if the biological knowledge is a
more recent discovery that the engineering knowledge...

~~~
lutusp
> But similarity is a symmetric thing ...

Yes, I agree with the idea, but the sense of "use ... similar to ..." implies
intent and temporal order in many contexts. If I use language similar to
Ernest Hemingway, am I justified in expressing it in the reverse order?

More realistically, in copyright and patent disputes, saying a person has
"used ... (a method) similar to" that of a presumed originator matters a great
deal, and a defendant in such an action may well reverse the order of the
words in his own defense -- "I didn't use a method similar to Mr. Smith's, he
used a method similar to mine." Clearly there's a temporal order implied in
this particular context.

> And if the biological knowledge is a more recent discovery that the
> engineering knowledge...

Good point. One might assume biology is farther along in its grasp of the
intellectual terrain than engineering, but that's not necessarily true.

~~~
theoh
It's only within a cultural context that it seems odd to liken a less famous
writer to a more famous one. For an outsider it would be unremarkable and
possibly helpful.

I think the feeling about comparing yourself with Hemingway, or Hemingway with
yourself (note: comparison does have an asymmetric feeling for me) may arise
from the fact that you don't really believe your (hypothetical, putative)
writing is similar to Hemingway's on the crucial dimension of quality. So it
naturally jars to think of Hemingway's writing defined as similar to it.

The words of the defendant in your example actually read to me more like a
Groucho Marx gag than a credible defense, but I'm in Ireland where usage may
differ.

------
kingkawn
Could also be titled, "humans continuously reinvent the wheel, take credit
anyway."

~~~
ooqr
Let's just hope God doesn't patent any of it all.

