3 ms·

I will point out two things: 1. The goal of the paper seems to be to take the biological metaphor as far as it can, and to make the strongest possible case tha

I will point out two things: 1. The goal of the paper seems to be to take the biological metaphor as far as it can, and to make the strongest possible case that it biology may work this way. (Neuroscience research was where the action was in the 90s so this makes sense). 2. As far as I know (last time I had the pulse of the field) there is no biological equivalent of back-propagation. Does anyone know if this is still the case? i.e. there is no circuitry for a signal to travel in the opposite direction in a nerve.

nonbel 10y ago
>"there is no circuitry for a signal to travel in the opposite direction in a nerve." I believe the term you are looking for is "dendro-axonic" (or try dendro-axonal, etc) transmission/synapse: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0006899379903950 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/00068993799... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37984 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37984 I would caution that, in general, you can find "evidence" in the literature for literally anything you could dream up when it comes to neuroscience though. So who knows in this case.