The presence of meaningful electrical patterns in spikes (spike directivity) challenges the spike timing dogma and temporal coding models. In order to understand the new model of computation a significant departure from Turing Machine is required
The Turing Machine and Connectionist Models
Any computational system has to access the “memory “to write (code) and read (decode) information
The Turing machine reads a symbol from the tape and moves the head one cell to the left L or to the right R depending on the internal states s(k) and received input i(k). While the computations are carried out the Turing machine does not accept any inputs from the external environment. Each output o(k+1) is determined only by inputs and internal machine states.
The spike timing neurons compress temporal information. While the model neglects fundamental information processing that occurs in the neuron, the main focus is on (synaptic) transmission of information between neurons. In order to be implemented on current computers (e.g.Turing machine) the entire framework is buried in a connectionist model of computation. The connection weights approximate only "weak" interactions between neurons [3].
Interactive Computation
Interactive computation describes a more general process of computation. Recently Dina Goldin and Peter Wegner have challenged the paradigm in computer science. Interactive computation is presented as a distinct non-Turing form of computation that involves intrinsic communication with the external world during the computation [1,2].
In fact God was unaware of Turing's work and has put forward a better model beyond limitations of Turing Machines as a formal mathematical model of the real-world.
Computation by Physical Interaction
The Turing Machines can be seen as an approximation of a general model of computation (GMC) carried on by physical interactions.
The electric charges are represented in blue color and the molecular structure in magenta color (e.g protein structure)
- The processing and exchange of information during spikes (action potentials, synaptic spikes) is first performed by interactions at molecular level, intracellularly;
- Neurons do not compress information in temporal domain, they process, communicate and store information;
- Schematic representation of computing by biophysical interaction, the protein structure in the cell, the flow of electric charges and electric interactions provide ‘direct’ access to stored "memory" to "read" and "write" information
- Information can be quickly "read" and "written" during electric interactions and becomes available due to electric field propagation;
- During the process of computation the inputs from the external environment are considered and can entirely change the outcome;
- Therefore, during biophysical interaction information from multiple sources can be easily instantaneously integrated.
- The structural arrangement at molecular level inside neurons provides the “memory” that is shaped and re-shaped continuously by biophysical interaction
- The image presented at http://neuroelectrodynamics.blogspot.com/p/spike-directivity.html proves this phenomenon.
NeuroElectroDynamics - Computation by Biophysical Interaction
Computation by physical interaction is the fundamental model of computation developed at molecular level in neurons and represents the hallmark of computation in the brain described in NeuroElectroDynamics (NED).
Biophysical interactions are continuously maintained under normal conditions in the brain. At least three regulatory interconnected systems are present at the neuronal level and extend to the whole brain scale
During spike activity “strong” interactions intracellularly occur within dendrites, soma, axon while ‘weak’ forms of interaction between neurons can be described by synaptic and non-synaptic interactions (e.g electric field). These interactions that intracellularly occur can be related to the mechanism of neurotransmitters action or different activities in astrocytic glial cells. The general framework of temporal coding and connectionist models approximates only a small part of "weak" interactions and ignores strong interactions that occur within cells [3,4]. In fact, the interaction between neurons (connectivity) is a result of information processing in the cell, it can change during every generated spike (see spike directivity).Typical connectionist weights approximate only weak interactions. Therefore, all connectionist models [5] have partially neglected the ability of cells to process information. The fundamental parallel distributed process of computation by interaction occurs inside the neuron [6], [7] and can lead by itself to intelligent action in single cells [8],[9][10].
The NED model integrates molecular computation in a general framework to achieve a better understanding of the brain and neurological diseases in computational terms.
References
1.Peter Wegner, 1997, Why interaction is more powerful than algorithms. Communications of the ACM, May , pages 81–91. Computation Theory
2.Dina Goldin, Peter Wegner, 2008, The Interactive Nature of Computing: Refuting the Strong Church-Turing Thesis”. Minds and Machines, v.18, n.1, p.17-38,
3.Dorian Aur, 2011, From Neuroelectrodynamics to Thinking Machines, DOI: 10.1007/s12559-011-9106-3, Cognitive Computation, http://www.springerlink.com/content/x1l7388475323758/
4. Dorian Aur and Mandar Jog 2010, Neuroelectrodynamics- Understanding The Brain Language , IOS Press, http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-473-3-i
5.James L McClelland and David E Rumelhart., 1988, Exploration in Parallel Distributing Processing., Brandford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Stuart Hameroff, Nip Alex, Mitchell Porter, Jack Tuszynski, 2002, Conduction pathways in microtubules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness. Biosystems 64, , pp. 149–168.
7. Nancy J. Woolf, Avner Priel Jack A. Tuszynski, 2009, Nanoscience:Structural and Functional Roles of the Neuronal Cytoskeleton in Health and Disease, Springer Verlag
8.Brian J Ford, 2010, The secret power of the single cell, The New Scientist, Volume 206, Issue 2757, 21, Pages 26-27
9. Brian J Ford, On Intelligence in Cells: The Case for Whole Cell Biology,2009, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, Vol. 34 No. 4, 350–365
10. Jack Copeland, Hypercomputation Minds and Machines, vol. 12 (2002), pp. 461-502.
5.James L McClelland and David E Rumelhart., 1988, Exploration in Parallel Distributing Processing., Brandford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Stuart Hameroff, Nip Alex, Mitchell Porter, Jack Tuszynski, 2002, Conduction pathways in microtubules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness. Biosystems 64, , pp. 149–168.
7. Nancy J. Woolf, Avner Priel Jack A. Tuszynski, 2009, Nanoscience:Structural and Functional Roles of the Neuronal Cytoskeleton in Health and Disease, Springer Verlag
8.Brian J Ford, 2010, The secret power of the single cell, The New Scientist, Volume 206, Issue 2757, 21, Pages 26-27
9. Brian J Ford, On Intelligence in Cells: The Case for Whole Cell Biology,2009, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, Vol. 34 No. 4, 350–365
10. Jack Copeland, Hypercomputation Minds and Machines, vol. 12 (2002), pp. 461-502.