The Map of Science: a directed citation graph showing the interdependence of fields

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/12/map-of-science.html

by DaniFong • 18 years ago

23 22 18 years ago

infoproc.blogspot.com

robg6• 18 years ago

If neuroscience is ever going to truly succeed, that link with mathematics better get more firmly established (even as it's surely underestimated based on the journals sampled). With the number of neurons and possible synapses, there needs to be advanced computational work to tame the complexity. The NIPS conference, for instance, is already decently big. But we need many more folks from that physics and engineering cluster.

DaniFong4• 18 years ago

Hah, nice catch!

It seems to me (though I am very biased!) that most of the landmark papers in the aggregate behavior of neural networks are mostly in physics (eg: Hopfield networks) and in computer science (eg: Perceptrons, Minsky).

indigoviolet2• 18 years ago

Those are artificial neural networks -- not necessarily anything like the real ones.

robg6• 18 years ago

You're right, but it quickly moved away from physics. McClelland and Rumelhart also did the seminal work in cognitive science in the 80s.

Here's an upcoming review: http://www-psych.stanford.edu/~jlm/papers/McClellandIPTOPiCS...

Then there are folks like Sejnowski (http://www.salk.edu/faculty/sejnowski.html; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Sejnowski) who pushed the field more into biology.

Still, I'm really surprised by the current chasm, if that map is reflective of the state of the field.

EDIT: For spelling.

ASUmusicMAN• 18 years ago

Also, something interesting I found using the main site http://eigenfactor.org/map/ was how music was linked neuroscience. What a cool site!

viergroupie• 18 years ago

I think you're misunderstanding the role of "neural networks" in academia. NIPS has a lot of value to the machine learning and AI communities but, beyond vague inspiration, it has almost no connections to neuroscience. There is a substantial body of work in computational modeling of neuronal behavior, but this stuff is much messier (PDEs with biologically determined constants) and limited in scope than the papers that appear at NIPS.

edit: Relevant conferences in computational neuroscience -

* http://cosyne.org/c/index.php?title=Cosyne_09

* http://www.cnsorg.org/2009/

* http://icms.org.uk/workshops/mathneuro2009

DaniFong4• 18 years ago

I don't really know much about neuroscience proper. I tend to look at the simplified artificial models and synthesize what might be possible, rather than look at all at the biology.

robg6• 18 years ago

Sorry, but the CS approaches have much to share with neuroscience even in these very early (and messy) days.

Machine learning is now used to analyze neuroimaging data and predict behavioral responses.

http://polyn.com/struct/NormEtal06_TICS.pdf

I also know of one group merging their intelligent tutors with fMRI data to predict types of confusion and offer better suggestions.

joeyo• 18 years ago

I'm surprised the link between neuroscience and economics has not shown up yet.

danteembermage• 18 years ago

We're working on it ;)

mct• 18 years ago

The Map of Science: a directed citation graph showing the interdependence of fields

Related Stories