Talk:Blue Brain Project

Starting date

May 2005 or July 2005? -- Boggie 15:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

At the molecular level?

This phrase requires more specificity—taken at its face value it would imply the use of an utterly fantastic amount of computer power. Do I presume correctly that the actual goal is to simulate bulk-level cytochemistry? --207.245.10.221 20:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems this question appears in the BBP FAQ:

Q: And this is all still at the cellular level of simulation. Simulating the brain down to the molecular level is inconceivable with the kind of computers we have today, no matter how much faster they get. Correct?

HM: Yes, it is very unlikely that we will be able to simulate the human brain at the molecular level detail with even the most advanced form of the current technology. However, there are other directions to solve this problem. We are going to move to molecular level modeling of a NCC. This software version could in principal be converted into a hardware version - a molecular level NCC chip - and then we can duplicate as many of them as we want.

I'm sorry, but this is clear as mud to me. How precisely does BMI intend to achieve the gigantic leap in computing power this would require? --207.245.10.221 20:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

They cant and they wont, they will use tons of simplifications, I bet that all that is meant by 'molecular level' is that they will attempt to model some simple molecular interactions, maybe genetic switches or something like that. We cant simulate a bacteria or an organelle or anything bigger then a few biomolecules at molecular level. Lack of computing power is one reason but lack of knowledge is also a serious problem. All in all I think that this article is pretty misleading as it can give an uninformed person an idea that our knowledge of the brain is much better then it really is.Kezorm (talk) 21:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

it CAN be done in one of 2 ways.

1)by use of quantum computers 2) by a combination of neuromorphic computers and conventional computers

the point, for the time being, is to create the mathematical framework and programs to run such molecular-level simulations, running them in practice is a whole different story though not as impactical when you consider that neuromorphic computing is rapidly advancing and will eventually approach biological realism itself, alleviating the computational load required to do this. if you want to know what I'm talking about do some internet research on the Brainscales and SpiNNaker supercomputers RJJ4y7 (talk) 15:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

First person voice

In some passages it is as if the project manager here speaks directly to the audience. Modify or remove? --Ettrig (talk) 14:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, the end of this article reads more like a blog than an encyclopedia. Either way, something needs doing to it. Benkid77 (talk) 16:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

References

I just tried to add a couple references, and I was reverted for some reason.

First, I added the official website at http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/ What's wrong with putting up a link to the Blue Brain website? Isn't that relevant?

Second, I added a new article about the project at http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/firing-up-the-blue-brain-.html Other links lead to articles about the project; what's wrong with adding another? 167.127.24.34 (talk) 19:25, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The official website was a duplication, although the other ref looks good. --Michael C. Price ^talk 04:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The notes and references sections seem badly named and have other duplicated enteries. --Michael C. Price ^talk 04:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Consciousness

Introduction says: It is hoped that it will eventually shed light on the nature of consciousness. This sounds rather like a media statement, not encyclopedic and is one of the first statements about the objectives of the project. While it is correct the functioning of the brain, could provide information about consciousness, I doubt that the people active in the blue brain project are primarily interested in consciousness, rather they want to know how the brain works. I also object the use of impersonal it. It would be far more informative to know who wants to know about consciousness. I am sure there are people, although, again, it is not the primary interest of the researchers. I tagged it with citation-needed. Ben ^T/_C 10:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

So, I poked at a bunch of the reference links in this article, and a bit of googling. The majority brought up consciousness, including comments by researchers on this subject. This is a rather silly "citation needed" IMO. The fact that it stayed for 3 years on a fairly significant article is surprising to me as a casual wikipedia user.

Below are from links *already in the article* (well, the bluebrain project website ones were from clicking down a couple of levels)

"The hope is that the virtual brain will help shed light on some aspects of human cognition, such as perception, memory and perhaps even consciousness." http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7470

"The ultimate goals of brain simulation are to answer age-old questions about how we think, remember, learn and feel..." http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page-58067-en.html

"The project will also throw new light on questions human beings have been asking for more than two and a half thousand years. What does it mean to perceive, to think, to remember, to learn, to know, to decide? What does it mean to be conscious?" http://jahia-prod.epfl.ch/site/bluebrain/op/edit/page-52741.html

"The Lausanne model, dubbed "Blue Brain," is the most radical attempt so far to investigate the mystery of consciousness." http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/neurotechnology-growing-a-brain-in-switzerland-a-466789.html

"“If we build this brain right, it will do everything,” Markram says. I ask him if that includes selfconsciousness: Is it really possible to put a ghost into a machine? “When I say everything, I mean everything,” he says, and a mischievous smile spreads across his face." http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/out_of_the_blue/

etc etc etc. Eventually got bored half-way through the links. They all bring up consciousness. Researchers, project, newspaper articles. It is kinda bloody obvious really. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.78.21 (talk) 13:18, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Disproving God

It can be said that this project is an attempt by corruptible man to place himself above God. See Tower of Babel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.3.66.27 (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you're joking. But "An attempt by corruptible man to place himself above God" requires an intentional action to do so, which the project are not. You could also claim that this is love to god by understanding his beautiful work. Now stop reading stories, troll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.250.73.78 (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Uploading Consciousness

I am curious as to why this link is on this page? Is there some reference in the relevant material that puts it here? This project is not an attempt to upload consciousness, it is a project to model the brain. (Someone has already commented above on whether the consciousness reference should be here at all.) 64.134.147.201 (talk) 21:07, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Dead link

First link (the one to Forbes magazine) redirects to '404 error' page. 62.121.68.77 (talk) 18:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Grant awarded?

The current version of the article says the project has received the EU grant and has therefore been renamed the Human Brain Project. How can this be, when the decision on the grant isn't due before February 2013? See:

http://www.artificialbrains.com/blue-brain-project

The source listed in the article is to a 2011 article which certainly cannot say that the grant has actually been awarded! Fauskanger (talk) 15:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• The section mixes up two things: First, a grant for a preparatory study was awarded in 2011. The report from this preparatory study was submitted to the EU in April 2012 and is available here http://www.humanbrainproject.eu/files/HBP_flagship.pdf
• Similarly, the other flagship contestants delivered there preparatory study report.
• The actual flagship proposals were prepared after April 2012 and submitted to the EU in October 2012 to be reviewed.
• As of now, the EU has not published a decision.

See also http://www.humanbrainproject.eu/flagship_call.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.178.187.220 (talk) 16:51, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, the Human Brain Project won the grant! Who wants to update the article? Fauskanger (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Please remind, that first parts of the project has allready been completed, first part was cofinanced by IBM research and partially developped by researchers in Lausanne (EPFL) and in India (I don't know the institute) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.84.84 (talk) 13:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Malware Link Removal

• Potentially Malicious Domain: (EXPLOIT, RBN Known Malvertiser IP 22)
• hxxp://www.dailygalaxy.com/
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/url/06f7d7c43c549e5e370a1e64d961bbbb9f4be55c29111d41e93ae9bb66489f23/analysis/1374427632/
• JS/Exploit-Blacole.cw
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/5ea1609b649e14ccfd84fec0d7e9d13cb0f885876f0ef5fae0407d23490ecddc/analysis/1374428349/
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/192346fedd2cc52353f89fd93fe1da383b6fa8a969c4c27f1fa663d4a40c3ae4/analysis/1374428351/
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/2656324fdda8179413cf416bd559e5f6f13864886a6d31907928e6334e64ebfa/analysis/1374428355/
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/a9dc933ca440b54c82be1fc9a71df252cf738ca3d908814adc656d9ffcc7c6ed/analysis/1374428365/
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/42430671c0fd1332eeb990373a1707da334520e2bae48d1dc9ee6df47b728125/analysis/1374428367/
• https://www.virustotal.com/de/file/8eb65132b441b07193c467814570e2c0959ceff07e35149247f531dde514782f/analysis/1374428377/
• REFERENCE: http://jsunpack.jeek.org/?report=49695ac9748fc84c3953dd8db54a661f52fd8be4
• http://urlquery.net/report.php?id=3902995
• SEE ALSO:
• http://quttera.com/detailed_report/www.dailygalaxy.com
• http://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.dailygalaxy.com
• http://www.UnmaskParasites.com/security-report/?page=www.dailygalaxy.com

--Gary Dee 18:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Broken reference.

Reference [9], which leads to a YouTube video, is defunct.

--BartholomewRSP (talk) 17:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Blue Brain Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070127195551/http://bluebrain.epfl.ch:80/page18924.html to http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18924.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060206160215/http://brain.cse.unr.edu:80/ncsDocs/ to http://brain.cse.unr.edu/ncsDocs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:20, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Blue Brain Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919051656/http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18700.html to http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18700.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18924.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://brain.cse.unr.edu/ncsDocs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:17, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blue Brain Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100822000357/http://www.neuroinformatics2008.org/congress-movies/Henry%20Markram.flv/view to http://www.neuroinformatics2008.org/congress-movies/Henry%20Markram.flv/view

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:39, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

A null model of the mouse whole-neocortex micro-connectome - 2019 Nature Communications paper

In 2019, Blue Brain demonstrated how neurons in the mouse neocortex form billions of synaptic connections. According to Science Daily, Researchers at the Project combined two high profile, large-scale datasets to produce something completely new -a first draft model of the rules guiding neuron-to-neuron connectivity of a whole mouse neocortex. They generated statistical instances of the micro-connectome of 10 million neurons, a model spanning five orders of magnitude and containing 88 billion synaptic connections. A basis for the world's largest-scale simulations of detailed neural circuits.

In a paper published in Nature Communications, the Blue Brain researchers have shown that the trick lies in combining these two views. By integrating data from two recent datasets -- the Allen Mouse Brain Connectivity Atlas and Janelia MouseLight -- the researchers identified some of the key rules that dictate which individual neurons can form connections over large distances within the neocortex. This was possible because the two datasets complemented each other in terms of entirety of the neocortex and the cellular resolution provided.

"how neurons in the mouse neocortex form billions of synaptic connections." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 29 August 2019. <>.

Paper - Reimann, M.W., Gevaert, M., Shi, Y., Lu, H., Markram, H., and Muller, E. A null model of the mouse whole-neocortex micro-connectome. Nature Communications 29 August 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11630-x

BacDfeZxy (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)BacDfeZxy (BBP employee)

References

Lack of criticism

This article lacks a section to outline the criticism this project has faced throughout its existence. Eco81 (talk) 08:31, 21 March 2023 (UTC)