Not yet. It is a serious error to think of action potentials as the relevant variable of cognition. The real action is subthreshold ionic currents, neuromodulatory tone, and even the big mess of cytosilic, mitochondrial, and nuclear metabolism. The CNS is a hugely complex analog computation matrix that only uses action potentials for INTRAcellulat communication. Everything between cells is comparatively subtle ionic and chemical flux.
Modeling at this level may be practical in retina at some point but modeling the entire CNS for pragmatic gains for Alzheimer’s disease research is not going to work.
And embodiment is critical. The brain is not a Cartesian input-to-output machine. It is almost the opposite. See the “enactivist” philosophy of cognition (Noe, Velera, Maturana).
(I also worked on the EU Human Brain Project with Markram and others; also on several similar NIH programs. )
Modeling at this level may be practical in retina at some point but modeling the entire CNS for pragmatic gains for Alzheimer’s disease research is not going to work.
And embodiment is critical. The brain is not a Cartesian input-to-output machine. It is almost the opposite. See the “enactivist” philosophy of cognition (Noe, Velera, Maturana).
(I also worked on the EU Human Brain Project with Markram and others; also on several similar NIH programs. )