Computer is a device that processes information. How is information represented in the brain? We can't determine immediately how our ideas are represented, but we can draw conclusions watching what happens when they come out to periphery and convert themselves into physical actions. It was definitely established that muscular tension depends upon the average firing rate in the nerve that ends up on this muscle. Hence, we can suppose that a single spike of a single neuron in the central nervous system doesn't matter and our ideas are encoded by the pulse activity averaged over a group of adjacent cells (called a cluster) and a certain period of time. The typical number of elements in such clusters is of the order of 1000. As to time parameters, the duration of one spike is approximately 1 millisecond so the firing rate of 1 neuron can't be more than 1 kilohertz. Multiplying it by the number of elements in the cluster, we get 1 megahertz, but keep in mind that the reaction time still can't be less than 1 millisecond because spikes are not rectangular.
At this time you might realize the shocking truth: our brain is so different from our computers that it is an analog (more exactly digital-analog) device at all. Meanwhile there is something that unites them. It is very symbolical that computer programs and musical records may be stored on the same type of media such as optical disks.
Anatomically, the brain consists of several parts which may be clearly distinguished and reproduce themselves in all humans. Their cell structure is different from the adjacent regions or they simply are visible from the surface. The inner space may be of two types – gray and white matter. The former is composed of cell bodies, the latter – of nerve fibers. Different parts of the brain are heavily interconnected. This supports the hypothesis that regions which look different are functionally different as well. All in all, anatomy distinguishes some couple of dozen different parts, but how to arrange them into a functionally meaningful construct?
Basic principles of a live neurocomputer are different from the Von Neumann architecture. Computer operative memory changes data by an instruction (the differential principle) and keeps data while power is on. Regeneration is a separate unconditional process. In live neural net, dynamic memory is a pattern of neural activity which should be explicitly supported by the system of nonspecific activation or by reverberation. In the second case, circulation of activity is also controlled by the nonspecific system. That is, in a computer, instructions are quick and their results remain forever. In a live neurocomputer actions are lengthy and continue while the activation signal remains. Retaining results also requires continuing activation.
Neurocomputing may be studied by purely mathematical methods. We can take 2D (or 3D) image as a main data unit, take associative instead of linear memory, and design a completely different computational model. The Von Neumann processor retrieves data from memory by the address of a memory cell. Associative memory uses keys instead. Also, a single neural net usually keeps multiple images which are superimposed in distributed storage. There are 2 types of such memory: autoassociative and heteroassociative. In the first case, the goal is just to memorize many images, then to recall one of them using some hints. In the second – associations between images of different types are remembered. This may be used to implement stimulus – reaction or event – handler pairs.
Two types of continuous computation are visible right away. In the second case, the system is placed into real-world conditions where external events come permanently so some reactions will be generated permanently too. In the first, we can use an image retrieved from autoassociative memory as a key for the next operation. This implements "free thinking" or "flight of ideas".
A computer comes with a ready set of instructions. The set of elementary, hardware-supported actions for a neurocomputer is smaller. This resembles the situation with fonts. The first typewriters had fixed sets. Then, they were replaced by graphics and fonts are usually generated by software now.
Science doesn't use the term software in application to living systems. Researchers study behavior instead. There is even a separate branch called behaviorism. It regards the nervous system as a black box and tries to formulate laws which link its inputs and outputs. The goal of brain research is seemingly to establish how different structures participate in generation of complex behavior. The task turned out to be tricky. The primitive approach is to determine correspondence between elementary actions and various parts of the nervous system. This encountered resistance from the opposite group which claimed that it is impossible and any function is equally distributed over the brain as a whole. For a computer engineer, the solution is obvious. Mapping is possible, but it is internal rather than external actions which should be mapped. Such as memory read/write operations.
The brain as a whole may be best approximated as a finite-state automaton, but this approach has one problem. Neural activity is highly dynamic and requires energy consumption. If you change the state and relax, it will always slip into the zero state. This issue is resolved using a specific architecture of neural nets. Karl Pribram in his "Languages of the brain" highlighted that many connections in the nervous system are reciprocal (bidirectional). If the biofeedback is negative, this serves for stabilization. If it is positive, this will create a generator which can maintain an activity once it was launched. As a result, you may look at an object, then close your eyes, but the image will remain and you even will be able to examine its details.
Abstract neurocomputer
Our computers are based on a Turing machine. Its principle is very simple. Complexity of computers comes from software, not from hardware. The same should be true for the human brain. The problem is that there are no tape and read/write head inside the human scull. Then, what is the prototype for the Turing model? Thorough consideration reveals that he formalized work of a human which uses some external storage such as paper. This approach resembles what is known in neuroscience as behaviorism. It doesn't try to penetrate into the head, regards the brain as a black box with inputs and outputs. What we need now – to describe how this box operates inside.
The first hint comes already from the input signal. Turing supposed that this is text while for the brain it is video. Speech and written textual input emerge only later in biological evolution and human civilization. Neurophysiological study shows that topology of an input image is retained well into the deep parts of visual analyzer so we can conclude that the format of 2D images is the main data format of brain hardware. The next principle is determined by the type of memory used. For any processor, memory input/output is one of the most important operations simply because a processor should process some data and data is stored in memory. The Von Neumann processor uses linear memory, that is a sequence of bytes which are accessed by their address. The human brain has associative memory instead. An elementary block uses a 2d (or 3D) array (millions) of neurons where information is represented by the pattern of activity. The image may be retrieved only as a whole, but this storage is still efficient because a single block can retain many different images. The method of retrieval uses a key which is also some image.
These two principles – a 2D image instead of a byte and associative instead of linear memory may be used as an axiomatic foundation of mathematical neurocomputing. The science may theoretically explore all the possible methods of data processing and all the possible constructs of neuro-machines. Meanwhile the brain is a ready working solution optimized by the nature so we can add further details from data gathered by biological experiments. The next striking difference between common computers and a neurocomputer is the absence of the clock generator. A live neurocomputer is asynchronous. Brain rhythms are well described, but alpha-rhythm of the visual cortex emerges when eyes are closed. Instead, activation is manifested by desynchronization. This creates a major problem. At each step of its operation, a computer should decide what to do next. A neurocomputer should decide when in addition. On the other hand, this feature creates additional flexibility and it is used. Human computations are based on insight. It is well known as a source for great discoveries, but indeed is used on routine basis in tens, maybe hundreds per day. The principle of a computer: take the next instruction from memory at the next pulse of a clock generator. In a neurocomputer, associative memory provides an appropriate idea at an appropriate moment. This sounds like the Holy Grail, but unfortunately this formula contains a lot of uncertainty. More specifically, insight is: 1. generated by hardware that is has no psychological explanation, 2. heavily dependent on previous experience. There are two types of insight: sensory and motor, that is related to input (perception) and output (action). These images are generated in different parts of the neocortex, but subjectively we feel them similarly because all the neocortex has almost the same structure like computer memory. Insights of the first type are especially interesting because they have an explanation from the theory of information. Visual input conveys digital-analog data which according to Shannon's formula contains a virtually infinite amount of information. The nervous system is simply unable to process it all so only some portions are captured when appropriate.