A Smarter Neuron?

Hi everyone,

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. I recently watched a talk by Dmitri Chklovskii, where he discussed how his team mapped the entire neural circuitry of a worm and attempted to simulate its behavior—only to find that the results fell short. He suggests that neurons might be more sophisticated than we currently assume, proposing that a single neuron could function as a feedback controller. I also came across a talk by Gabriele Scheler, who shares a similar view that neurons are smarter than existing models suggest. She’s working on a model that incorporates intracellular processes and explores how neurons might self-program. You can find their papers here:

•	Chklovskii et al.: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.02.573843v1
•	Scheler: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.06865

Do you think these ideas are significant for designing something like a neocortical circuit? I’m curious about your opinions!

4 Likes

We also think biological neurons are smarter than point neurons, we’ve published papers about this which you can have a look at here:

And a bigger list of our papers here: Further Reading

1 Like

Hey @James, just sharing my two cents here too. :slight_smile: Interesting question!

I have some interest in connectomics and I think I heard a phrase along the lines of “a dirty secret in computational neuroscience is that we had the connectome of C. elegans since mid 1980s, yet still cannot simulate a complete C. elegans”. (This isn’t to discourage mapping efforts for more complex connectomes like mouse or human brains—quite the opposite.)

I think the papers you shared are indeed valuable for designing neocortical circuit models!

I had this thought experiment:

Let’s say we had:

  1. A full connectome (complete wiring + synapses + receptor types, etc.)
  2. Full biophysical properties (ion channel densities, pathways, etc.)
  3. Enough computational power to stimulate every neuron with Hodgkin-Huxley level detail, including molecular dynamics.

While this may theoretically enable full-resolution brain simulation, I believe this primarily represents “copying” rather than “understanding” the brain (though this would still be an extraordinary achievement).

I think models proposed by Chklovskii and Scheler would still be valuable even in this scenario because I think these tools/models would help us better understand, interpret, design, and/or engineer neural networks with desired behavior. :slight_smile:

Just my two cents. Thanks for sharing those papers.

1 Like

I’m working on a draft post for this forum, but in the meantime you may find my project building a personal digital brain interesting: Introducing my Tinker Cast - Michael Seydel's Blog

(Full disclosure: I’m a tinker, I have a bachelors in computer science but I’m not an academic/researcher and I know very little of biology)

Also, are you familiar with Michael Levin’s work regarding bioelectric networks?

2 Likes

Hi @micseydel - thanks for sharing! Reminded me of the juggl plugin in Obsidian.

I’m not personally familiar with Michael Levin’s work, but possibly other members of the community might be. :slight_smile: Looking forward to your post!

Here it is My thousand brains-adjacent personal project

1 Like

Consider taking a long, hard look at Hameroff’s work.

“…neurons might be more sophisticated than we currently assume…” ya think? Hameroff said this a decade ago.