Search

Turing (1937) introduces a model of code that is followed by other pioneers of computing machines (such as Flowers 1983, Eckert, Mauchly, Brainerd 1945 and others). One of them is John von Neumann, who defines the concept of optimal code in the context of the conception of EDVAC. He later uses it to build on in his theoretical considerations of the universal constructor (von Neumann 1966). Von Neumann (1963) further presents one of the first neural network models, in relation to the work of McCulloch and Pitts (1943), for both theoretical purposes (von Neumann probe) and practical applications (computer architecture of EDVAC). The aim of this paper is (1) to describe the differences between Turingʼs and von Neumannʼs conceptualizations of code and the mechanical computing model. Between von Neumann's abstract technical conception (von Neumann 1963 and 1966) and Turingʼs more concrete biochemical conception (Turing 1952). Furthermore, (2) we want to answer the question why these influential models of mechanisms (predominantly in computer science) have so far been ignored by philosophers of the new mechanism (Machamer, Darden, Craver 2000, Glennan 2017). We will show that these classical models of machines are not only compatible with the new mechanism, but moreover complement it, since they represent a completely separate type of model of mechanism, alongside producing, maintaining and underlying (Zámečník 2021). The final (3) and main goal of our paper will be an attempt to relate von Neumannʼs and Turingʼs notion of mechanism to Barbieriʼs notion of extended mechanism (Barbieri 2015). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial neural networks, inspired by the biological networks of the human brain, have become game-changing computing models in modern computer science. Inspired by their wide scope of applications, synthetic biology strives to create their biological counterparts, which we denote synthetic biological neural networks (SYNBIONNs). Their use in the fields of medicine, biosensors, biotechnology, and many more shows great potential and presents exciting possibilities. So far, many different synthetic biological networks have been successfully constructed, however, SYNBIONN implementations have been sparse. The latter are mostly based on neural networks pretrained in silico and being heavily dependent on extensive human input. In this paper, we review current implementations and models of SYNBIONNs. We briefly present the biological platforms that show potential for designing and constructing perceptrons and/or multilayer SYNBIONNs. We explore their future possibilities along with the challenges that must be overcome to successfully implement a scalable in vivo biological neural network capable of online learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]