[Comp-neuro] Re: Attractors, variability, noise, and other subversive ideas

Bill Lytton billl at neurosim.downstate.edu
Wed Aug 20 15:53:05 CEST 2008

>  I have to say that as someone who doesn't share your (Jim's) perspective of
>  what modelling should be like, that this proposal sounds a little bit
>  horrific.  It is clearly written with the best of intentions, but I fear

I generally share Jim's perspective of what modeling should be like, but I agree with Brad that
Jim's prescription is excessively restrictive.  The particulars of model verification in
Jim's posting sound promising, but the spirit of rewarding the collaborationists (ok Jim said
collaborators) and ousting the lone wolf is not appealing.

Even if we cannot all agree to disagree, we can all agree that we don't agree.  We can further
agree that the problems are complex.  The approach that eventually results in a breakthrough
will necessarily come as a suprise to many of us.  

We're all fans of paradigm-busting.  More and more rules at NSF, NIH and the journals is not
likely to reward and encourage the paradigm-busters, wherever they may be.  That said, it's
clear that computer models, like other research material, should be public and free of
needless obscurantism.


William W. Lytton, MD
Professor of Physiology, Pharmacology, Biomedical Engineering, Neurology
State University of NY, Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY
billl at neurosim.downstate.edu http://it.neurosim.downstate.edu/~billl

More information about the Comp-neuro mailing list