4. Cognitive Neuroscience Methods I

[@mitocw]

* NOTE: Lecture 3. Master Class: Human Brain Dissection (in-class dissection-video not recorded) View the complete course: ocw.mit.edu/9-13S19 KZbin Playlist: kzbin.info/aero/PLUl4u3cNGP60IKRN_pFptIBxeiMc0MCJP

[@charlesdandrade]

=(

[@chapikownous729]

@@charlesdandrade Right? Was really looking forward to it being recorded :((

[@NOName-nn3jv]

🙄 why nooooot??

[@davidfleischer4407]

Several lectures missing. Also on the OCW site; what’s the point of advertising the course and then taking the content away? Just like a sick mother who makes her child ill , or a used car salesman who sells you a car with only three wheels!

[@NOName-nn3jv]

@@davidfleischer4407 or like a drug dealers, who controls the supply of crack on streets

[@americancivicsinstitute6801]

Thank you for giving us free GOLD!! I am not being sarcastic. The fact that the best universities are willing to post this stuff for us for free is an amazing service to humanity. Read your history, you will know why we appreciate this so much.

[@charleswalters5284]

For instance the european 'religion' (church of rome) imposed death penalty for reading for 1000 years. Rockefeller family, founding the national education association, said " i want a nation of workers, not thinkers" . The n. e. a. has sabotaged public education ever since, the same family put lead in gasoline, knocking down the average I. Q. in our country by 5 to 10 points. Remember Malala? Bad guys tell lies; education exposes them for what they are. Yay M. I. T. !

[@phosphate66]

I wish I knew who to thank for making the push towards filming these lectures and posting them online for free. This truly gives me hope for humanity.

[@mitocw]

You can thank the MIT Council on Education Technology and the MIT faculty... they were asked to come up with MIT's response to online learning. MIT OpenCourseWare was their response in 2001. Here's the press conference announcing the launch: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aompp6SFiLeml5o

[@itsnotaphase1651]

That’s so amazing thank you!

[@charleswalters5284]

​@@mitocwBucky Fuller's idea couple decades earlier. Thanks M. I. T. !

[@cashbuyer4221]

RE: face blindness / prosopagnosia , I think the best way to try and understand what it feels like is to imagine what its like when you look at a tree or foliage with large leaves. We all know what leaves look like. We can tell the difference between leaf types, can see all the details, recognize unique features, etc… You can stare at one of these leaves for 2 hours, but once you stop looking and try to identify it among others at random, you have no idea which one you were staring at for an hour. I live in Florida, so when I first read about this, I tried it on Palm leaves and it helped understand what it would be like to know what faces are, recognize their components and features, but not be able to recognize them as unique from others unless comparing them next to eachother.

[@miaosov]

in my last year of HS & these lectures are so fascinating; I never seem to loose focus! hopefully my future professors are as engaging and able to explain ideas this clearly :) thank you MIT!

[@Mychell24]

I think you just gave me that piece of information I was lacking. Now I have the tools. Thank you! It made a wicked big difference! You believing in your self… is a gift. Thank you for choosing to be a teacher, a healer. You’re awesome!

[@infinitecosmos]

Thanks Maam for this best lecture and Thanks MIT for recording this lectures for normal people in the world who cannot afford to go to MIT Love from India🇮🇳

[@jkanthjk5338]

Omg I’m also in India watching this and overwhelmed by this!!

[@noahl.1003]

I never knew neuroscience was this interesting. Wow! I'm just so completely mesmerized.

[@bradsillasen1972]

@32:57 "Your perceptual system is tuned to the statistics of its input". Most profound!

[@osirusj275]

Is that the only nuggets from it... If yes then I can skip the vid

[@bradsillasen1972]

@@osirusj275 Certainly not, but it's one I found especially meaningful.

[@Zimnaan]

@@osirusj275 these videos aren’t recommended to be skipped. Nancy has a conversational style that will lead you through points of interest with relative ease.

[@osirusj275]

@@Zimnaan actually I have watch fully the videos... And I feel it can be skipped... Provided the summary is comprehensive..

[@nettle8605]

Nooo, I was looking forward to the brain dissection lmaooo

[@fitted3k]

Lol did us dirty

[@fionajane2665]

What a lovely lecturer. Very personable and she presents the subject in an interesting way. Im a layperson who has a thirst for knowledge. I appreciate these lectures being in the public domain.

[@victorga7916]

Iam from El Salvador, learning every day every class of this chanel. Thank you. I love to learn

[@nikhilmalhotra101]

As a person studying this field with AI, my hypothesis is that the blood flow increases because we try and predict more features in terms of faces. It is like a curve of saturation. For objects it reaches faster than faces. This experiment can be run in a couple of other ways as well 1. Use non generic shapes and showcase that . Not a square, not a triangle but a tetrahedron in 3 dimensions ~ Blood flow should increase 2. Use known faces of family and tell the person before hand . This would reduce the blood flow on faces We can conduct these two experiments to verify the hypothesis

[@perttituorila4568]

You could also test harder objects by testing professionals of different fields; show (music) instrument repairer pictures of guitar fret boards and ask her to analyze how worn it is. Ask car mechanic how worn out piston rings are etc. Answering these kinds of questions demands eye for detail and if that part of the brain is responsible for generic detail recognition its activity should be comparable to face recognition task?

[@douglasgoldfarb3421]

The brain works through the brain and full nervous system the organs have feeling and chi Gung and consider nuerodynamics the mind is also tibetian

[@douglasgoldfarb3421]

Can pick up Cory bear of the nuerodynamics beglitiers suny downstate

[@Crawdaddy_Ro]

​@@douglasgoldfarb3421 I'd like MIT or Stanford to study the brain of a person reading your comment. It would likely be a leap ahead for science.

[@mamichnya]

Great stuff, Prof. K! I love this quote (regarding implicit bias and, by extension, racism): "Your perceptual system is tuned to the statistics of its input". Regarding how much detail to give about anything, the right thing is to go with your gut. To paraphrase A. Lincoln (and Ricky Nelson): You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time, so you might as well please your self and don't worry about the rest. They'll either get over it or they won't. Love your teaching. Keep up the great work!

[@williamlewis8773]

The sound playback levels on this A/V recording make it much easier to hear your voice than was the case with the first A/V I found for this course of study . Thanks .

[@zhinan888]

I am proud my Alma Mattar for putting this great content online for free. I'll consider donate to them.

[@andreafeelsfantastic]

I have participated in a whoooole lot of prosopagnosia studies and I really appreciate the chance to learn more about what I have, in a small way, helped science figure out!

[@adrianwright8685]

18:15 "I" surely doesn't have to be unknown - you just need to look directly at the light source and take that measurement. Computing R would still be very difficult as lots of different possibilities - angles of reflection, absorbancy at different frequencies - would be available.

[@busebxx]

I started to think that I am losing many things when I continue to work rather than study. Those courses are awesome I wish I could join every single of them :(

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

The brain equalls the mind by consciousness

[@fransiskusentymaras9986]

Hi, thanks but I don't find they r the same; brain in more biophysical, mind is more alchemy, I guess. Thx again.

[@willboler830]

I have a slightly hard time remembering faces and associating names to them. Once I've become familiar, it's easy, but if I've met someone for only 10 minutes, unless I can somehow relate them to someone I've met before, I'll probably forget them flat out. Names, some of the people I work with closely day in and day out, slip my mind, and I've even misremembered or forgotten girlfriend names (not because I was cheating). Yet, I can memorize numbers, and nearly on a long-term scale (remembering a SKU for a brand of socks from 10 years ago working warehousing). The brain is truly fascinating!

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

See in the muscle of the wing is the access to blood

[@maksimnikiforovski2034]

"Philosophers like weird stuff..." that hurt! As a philosopher I love how she considered some philosophy, although some philosophy of mind would come handy for the students as well.

[@Ellipsis115]

Notes to self: 7:20 These quotes are so insanely good. "Ill-posed" problems is a very important concept it seems I will need to get used to recalling to mind 45:06 The honda civic example is probably better at presenting this (note to self tiemstamp honda example) but this demonstrates the fundamental thing that our whole reality is based on not just input but conception which ofcourse on a very fundamental level makes sense - if we have the exact same input as output we'd be an infinitely stiff mirror, not a human and the very fact we can give different outputs tells us more than any following information, I would argue it says a lot about entropy and some really fundamental questions but I will try to never be so arrogant as to think I have more than ideas and a grasp of such concepts. And indeed we do not know if reality is stopping-starting-stopping-starting --->>> THERE ARE THINGS WE CAN NEVER KNOW IF WE DON'T KNOW if I can accept that assertion all that I know is that I know nothing but knowing emotionally the consequences for that I continue to search for a different model, based on the very total uncertainty I am combating I use uncertainty to ward it off and search to doom myself in a certain reality or a reality that is any different from this one. ... also something something entropy if it is real we have certainty but its not truly testable, if it isn't nothings real, models and things and models and things and we'd probably have to wait litterally forever to know if entropy is solvable so we need other methods... urgh and the problem is in waiting forever our brains would have no room to exist as they would have dissapated given entropy is real... urgh the circular logic and entropy nessesarily asserts certainty but then it like all things nessesarily must given uncertainty breaks itself aghghghhhhh, I need to read a whole lot more on the basics and then ask a proffessor. Damn I've just thought, assert that 4x = 16x/4 -> something different can be the same? I guess it depends on your model of mathematics but if you accept uncertainty two equivilent things can never be equal, hence in reality there are things like no cloning theorems so does this demostrate a break in reality? Urgghgghgh I really need to test this better with better knowledge and motivation or just direction on wha the heck I'm doing another time. 49:15 OHHHH Yeah I was wondering very briefly about this but ofcourse energy cannot be created or destroyed - therefore if there is energy use you must see how it is being delivered. I now better appreciated more good conceptions of reality. 58:05 I guess I need to be able to recall this to mind, the question is how and how do I know when I have a better approach? None the less it is good at confronting many areas like physics where I see issues being identified and yet what I see to be poorly reasoned persuits of those issues which is just using more of the same e.g. AI researchers don't seem to ask about if something is a fundamental problem with AI and if there is anything they can compromise or change in the fundamentals to proceed (which is a massive and non-boring/non-trivial process so I don't see the need to shy away but can also be quite simple in just identifying the issue but so many at least what I gather which granted could be based on stereotype will push on regardless of their remaining tools to actually solve the problem, although ofcourse brute force might accidentally end up working but I think it is always atleast worth considering as many alternatives as possible if you have the time which in these persuits we very much do) and also physisists seem very keen on new theories or extentions to theories but never backtracking, same as in technology, public transit is not the solution, this 20+year possibly impossible persuit into self driving is the way to go. I started this comment with poor reasoning on a downware trend off of medication with less working memory but my ability to manage it seems to have improved although I can see I am barely hanging on, constantly almost missing what the heck I was on about in a way that is just not present when medication is near its peak effect.

[@timthien1063]

My answer to the question: 55:42 Does this show that this region is selectively responsive to faces? No, the problem with this experiment is that human faces are not more complex than objects but the brain only requires more blood flow because they have to differentiate the differences between each individual faces therefore lead to a higher neural activity. The objects recognition only require a brief scan because objects are clearly different (shapes) therefore it is not hard. Instead for this experiment, there should be 3 laptops or any three of a kind object.

[@K89032]

I love how anyone could find another way to think about the same data and analyse it differently. Thanks doctor Nancy for this last assignment. It is really inspiring.

[@762kilo]

Im here researching any affects of a brain injury i had a few years ago... I had a skull fracture and sub dermal hemorrhaging, went to sleep after. Lost memory from that day and most of my hospital stay, had a few concussions after that, i feel memorizing names is very challenging for me at times.

[@fransiskusentymaras9986]

Thank you Dear Miss, the first time I have attended your very nice class in this UTube.

[@freinds323]

I am fascinated by the lectures and the lecturer! I really want to work in her lab one day

[@wen03]

When she said we can recognize people's specific motions I totally tough on how I certainly know which member of my family is walking around the house!

[@eddied.3426]

Absolutely fascinating. The end made me think about this: comparing one person to another is easier than differentiating between two dogs or cats and it is easier to do those than two ants or elephants or crabs. But between crab and dog it is easy just like between crab and human. Also I think the intricacy and difference between features would matter. The difference between triangle and circle is obvious but between 2 chinese symbols would be harder etc.

[@charlesbrightman4237]

Facial recognition at about 44:40 in the video: How many people have been falsely accused in the justice system due to 'eye witness' accounts who cannot tell unknown faces apart nor things like different colors, or even conscious or unconscious bias?

[@MarcDonahu]

Nancy is a very good teacher 👏

[@briseboy]

Notice that "mind" is inextricably connected to physical events, whether self-monitoring, or external, environmental event. Useful solely for prediction, a brain enables motor action quickly, unlike the slow hormonal and related processes of rooted organisms. Whenever representation or speculation arises, it may be subject to error. As prediction becomes more remote than immediacy, errors and dissociation increase. Any individual organism accumulates limited experience. While our symbolic signaling is prone to both error and abuse, the representations occurring in memory and prediction have utility in survival and reproduction. Thus due to the ever-changing nature of the universe - all detectable components being dynamic - selection, and consequently, or coevally, evolution occurs. The word "mind" is illusory in that it, like species or phenotype, it may be inaccurate over time in implying stasis, architecture. Brains and neurons respond, through constant dynamical change, not only in early development, but constantly with every divisible sensory experience. So, mind is process, constant comparison, of evolved useful factors of relationship, interoceptive/introspective with sensed exteriorly sensed changes. Speculation, hypothesis, contingently "factual" associations which preserved an individual organism in the past, or combinations of likely successful response, are heuristically distilled into a "me." We humans are obligate social, so dependent upon our kind, for education in order to survive, that it requires long years of such nurturance to survive. We are "altricial", as opposed to other obligate social and less socially dependent, more precocial animals. The manipulative capacity of our hands and brachiation coevolved with the manipulative capacity of our brains and other sociodynamic factors. We manipulate not only through speech and coalitional organization, but may persist in simulatory, representational, error, for many, many generations. That comment focuses only upon vulnerabilities to error, but such focus is useful to individuals subject to unwarranted assumptions that may persist in any field of endeavor.

[@stevensvideosonyoutube]

What appears in my mind is the next logical signal of deviation, what do I see wrong, .. what is the next thing I notice wrong,.. what do I see as the continuing sequence of deviation? Recognition, pattern, identification.

[@LaplacianFourier]

21:55 Thinking people luh the Honda Fit.

[@serbestatis942]

About the perceived color of the car (21:15) If the color of the car is the same in all images, and the illuminant is of different color in each image, I'd think that the light coming from the car should not be grey? (The light coming out from the car should be red-green-yellow-blue respectively, because that wavelength is what we see. Hence we are deceived about the original color of the car.) If the car did not reflect red light in the first image and green in the second image and so on, I would not be able to see the cars in those colors, respectively. So, I find it confusing when you say that "the light coming out from each car is the same: grey". The light coming out from each car would be grey when they are illuminated with a white light but in this case, the cars do not reflect grey light: They reflect the colors that we actually perceive and report. Is this not true?

[@jpoesen]

Thank you! This is driving me crazy too! Take a screenshot, open it in photoshop and sample the colours with a colour picker in the same place. The body colour is different each time, which is logical since a different colour light illuminated the car each time. Yes, the original colour was gray, but if you shine a red light on a gray building it will look red too, and your eyes wouldn't be wrong since red light would be reflected off the building, not white light. What am I missing?

[@gregoryhoffmann7020]

[I] is also known at the detection point [L]. Ie draw a line directly from [I] to [L].

[@archetypealch3my290]

Awww man I wanted to see the brain 🧠 , oh well I'm still thankful for these uploads MIT

[@briseboy]

The very good question comparing prosopagnosia to ability to distinguish individuals by hand, brings up other, often dynamical, ID variance. First alerted in early childhood by a mother who emphasized ID of often absent father (in Navy, deployed for months at a time) by gait, and being involved in precise physical arts, i noticed the acquired ability to tell pianists' hands, the bodies and motion of those significantly in ballet, as opposed to other physical arts and sports, with the exception of some ball sports, the difference between those who had been trained in hatha yoga and other flexible disciplines (it is dynamical, motion-quality perception). For a long time, i would question strangers with my guesses, being correct to an extreme level since mid-adolescence. Perceptual cues, then, are individual, yet vary culturally. We know that giraffes and so many other patterned mammals i've studied, that cues useful to species tend to be rather specific, though so many birds and mammals can recognize individuals, including humans, from some i've noted or implied. Some unexploited or unabused animals appear to learn quite quickly. We ourselves too often reject that this process is quite conscious, as search imaging is highly useful across taxa.

[@briseboy]

A very odd occurrence when viewing the Dutch politician test: immediate response was 4. Within a few seconds, short term memory assured it was 3, then 2. For no discernible reason the final number felt assured, correct. But not 1, even though the use of photos suggested that extended time could be a factor.

[@iremembersomethings]

LOVING THESE COURSES!!!!

[@charlesbrightman4237]

Information from the picture at about 5:00 in the video, (person running along the beach): Could also have deeper meaning, for example, an entity comes into existence on the right side of the picture until they are fully existent in the middle of the picture, and then cease to exist as they exit the picture on the left side of the picture. A compilation of life itself.

[@dalpio]

21:29 Here she mistook L for I; I think she meant to say "...it's making inferences about I, the illuminant..."

[@neoepicurean3772]

44:42 I saw pretty quick there were only 2 people. Only C3 threw me, but then I worked out that was just the facial hair pattern, and there wasn't any facial hair pattern to reference, so I stuck with 2.

[@AnneNicholson-yy5ro]

Some people use their movement recognition instead is their facial recognition systems.

[@Rezin_8]

In 7th grade we dissected a sheep's eye and I think about R.... Reflective property of the inside of the ship's eye gave it great night vision.... I've been jealous of that sheep for 23 years

[@mojdemarvast2366]

Faces go under the same category and then details are scanned Objects go under different category...without dealing with details Amazing Brain... Brain tries to know itself!

[@jamodrummer]

You suggested that LEDs placed on the body in a dark room still gives rise to the perception of a person. I saw exactly that at Burning Man in Nevada. Fascinated me …

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

Dr the visual of the nerves of the eye is the center of the memory

[@helicalactual]

Your brain analogizes. Thank you.

[@turdferguson3400]

The pictures about 45:10 are tricky because they're clearly taken at very different ages and with different hair styles and facial hair styles. It's much harder to say if two pictures belong to the same person if they're taken years apart..

[@coleoleoleo4045]

Right, but they were Dutch politicians, and Dutch people easily recognized that there were only two. If they were pictures from different ages/hair styles of Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks Americans would quickly say “two people.” The point is your face recognition brain circuitry works with faces you know & are familiar with, not with faces you don’t.

[@turdferguson3400]

@@coleoleoleo4045 not exactly my point. My point is that the faces with beards are different from faces without beards even if they belong to the same person. I agree it takes some familiarity to say these two faces belong to the same person with or without a beard, but I'm also saying these are clearly different faces. Like if those pictures were all taken at the same time with the same hairstyle and facial hair but from different angles, I suspect most people would guess about 2 or 3 or 4 people, not 7.

[@clickpwn]

I was actually able to get the right answer(2 people) by recognizing face shape and features. However I learned and practiced portrait drawing for few years and trained myself to analyze people’s facial features individually.

[@pistopitpit]

Here is the answer from ChatGPT about what colour each car is after uploading screenshot of an image presented by profesor: „ The image you provided shows four cars with different color filters applied. The colors are as follows: 1. **Top left car:** Green 2. **Top right car:** Purple 3. **Bottom left car:** Blue 4. **Bottom right car:** Orange „ So looks like ChatGPT: 1) Did not recognise each car is in fact grey 2) Similar to human it recognised each car has a different colour. 3) It recognised the cars are all grey but prioritised human like perception as the final answer. 4) Something else.

[@pistopitpit]

Here is the answer from ChatGPT when I uploaded the same image of 4 cars but this time I asked it what is the colour of each car if you ignore the filters applied: To determine the colors of the cars without the filters, we need to analyze the image while accounting for the color changes due to the filters. Here’s an interpretation of each car’s color by visually analyzing the image: 1. Top left car (with green filter): This car appears to be a dark color, likely red. 2. Top right car (with purple filter): This car also appears to be a dark color, probably green. 3. Bottom left car (with blue filter): This car seems to be light-colored, likely yellow. 4. Bottom right car (with orange filter): This car seems to be a dark color, probably blue.

[@kellypremium8507]

What happened to lecture 3？　I can't find it.

[@nanigahcaleb]

Yeah same with me. In the introduction, I remembered she said they'd have a live brain 🧠 dissection which wouldn't be available for online viewers. This I'm assuming could be the reason.

[@kalimbodelsolgiuseppeespos8695]

Philips ha concentrato tutte le rimanenti forze economiche su questo.

[@ScorpioXVirgo]

44:40 is further evidence that a blind person suddenly gaining sight wont recognize something by sight alone

[@NeuraPod]

Love these lessons. Thank you.

[@GfnWiz]

Makes me curious if you could force the use of peripheral vision and see how much faster a human can recognize an animal that has forward facing (predator eyes) vs. Side view non-predatory animals or humans.

[@DuckGia]

So, the whole filed probably be extracting algorithms from the mind. It would be quite random if we can build such thing the other way around. But should be a great way. Instead of exploring in our own but rather asking much more efficient thinker to do that for us.

[@jamesduggan7200]

kinda confusing (for me) distinguishing between memory and recognition

[@mcDynamit]

In zen they say you can't bite our own teeth. In that regard how can the mind understand itself. It is aldo said that in order to solve a problem you need to go up in the organizational level which gave rise to the problem in the first place. Any thoughts?

[@ergobenchlab-linhazugi2320]

I understand the problem of create requirements in system engeneering but ...if the mind is not the brain the requirement maybe come from another understanding

[@NoOne-jr2wp]

I wish I could see the brain dissection

[@user-cx5ni7me6l]

Great to have this online

[@DamianReloaded]

20:50 Those cars are definitely not the same color and definitely not grey. Their average color veer towards the general color the audience saw (checked this with a photo editor)

[@scorpiotech123]

There is a problem with the fact that this is a video. The light incident on the screen at the time of videoing, will also affect the perceived colour in the video. We can infer from the shadows around the screen, that there will be differences in the amount of light reflected by the screen and I would suggest that the material of the screen might also affect the received light on the video. Video screens on monitors or phones also have differences.

[@DamianReloaded]

​@@scorpiotech123 Nah, she oversold this a bit. What she calls "clues" are so heavy that you might just as well call them the color of the car. I checked the RGB values in GIMP and the "gray" is veered towards the colors she mentions. When asked "what color" people won't say it's 99% gray. They will say the color they see in the 1%. I think what she meant would be exemplified a lot better with photos of the same car illuminated with different (actual) lights and then ask the audience what color they think the car really is. Then show a picture of the car illuminated with white light to reveal the "true" color.

[@scorpiotech123]

@@DamianReloaded Thank you for this reply. Colour perception interests me at the moment, because we can not ever really know, if the colour I see, is the same as you see. You have an excellent point about the naming of colour. After all gray-scale photographs have lots of different grey colours, but we call them all grey, although we occasionally add light or dark as a modifier. I am glad you did the experiment : it helped me understand more. I'm a bit worried about the interpretation of fMRI, too.

[@DamianReloaded]

@@scorpiotech123Even when the layout of our eye receptors may not be identical, we can build artificial sensors that are identical and will (under the same conditions) measure the frequency of light in the same way with high precision. Cheers.

[@DamianReloaded]

@@scorpiotech123 It's speculated that our minds create a model of the world as we learn from it. Our brains are very good at pattern recognition and if a person has good sight she can get to learn what to expect from something that is real and something that is a picture. She will look for shading/shadow clues that are coherent with the lighting of the environment. She will move around to get a hint of the perspective and the distance to the object, an therefore predict it's size. If it's something she knows, she will know if at that distance the size is the correct one (with no optical illusions). She will excel at recognizing and isolating the object boundaries from the background and will notice if the background behind the object in the picture doesn't match the background behind the picture. All this combined and probably more is what we use to know the difference between an object and the photo of an object. At some point we learn that there are photos and reflections so it's part of our experience that there are times when things we see are not real, so we look for them.

[@LibertyScott-x6i]

I usually don’t look at people because I just don’t have an interest in them. I also have come to notice people get weird about people making eye contact. The old ways of just having etiquette are gone. People are just objects and this is very clear when mass shooters can walk in crowded parking lots and be in full armor and NO one sees them. People are objects- Cool lecture.

[@kathrinm2420]

Do the monkeys at 12.24 min with only 2 cone types in their retina then have a red-green colour blindness?

[@golgumbazguide...4113]

Explore Golgumbaz with Guide Jahangir

[@seasnowcai]

I wish the Dutch experiment can be run with subjects of super recognizers! I am so curious whether they do have some superior abstract models to help them recognize faces. Or do they just have superior memories of faces? I probably confirmed myself of an underperforming system: although I watched Nancy’s lectures from the previous year and remembered that there were very few people’s faces, I still couldn’t help guessing 20……

[@olgafatica3445]

I'm sorry but the assumption at 27:28 that the guy with prosopagnosia is nice as if socially awkward people or people on the spectrum are not nice people and not good is disgusting. That an MIT brain scientist speaks like that about neurodivergent people in this day and age is astonishing. Ethical behaviour is ethical behaviour whether for NTs or NDs. Nice is rather an empty word and it only means likeable. Most people like unethical people because they are more powerful. Power you give them. When you will stop thinking that someone who behaves nice is also good, the world will be a better place. Thanks for the course, this and the others. I have been casually using them since iTunesU times ( that probably shows my age) and you're doing a great service.

[@Halalmode_501]

18:27

[@zonegreat5273]

I did it!! I saw 2 faces only! 😂 waiting for my brain to be scanned

[@paolofrigeriomusic3691]

"How does the mind rise up from the brain, from the "phisical thing" ?" this is the biggest question indeed. BUT. are we actually ready for an inversion of the "dance" ? does anyone in Neuroscience field can conceive the opposite question? "How the physical thing came out from the mind"? Maybe We are already livng in "the answer", maybe WE ARE the answer, even without knowing how it comes. Pure blindness is working, telling us we are separate existence from i.e. the milky way or the smallest grain of sand on the beach. Blindness actually generated from the mind itself. We shall play better the game in the "consciousness" field? It' beyond the mind, the KNOWER of the mind. Paolo

[@kalimbodelsolgiuseppeespos8695]

Gotcha . Kerry ldd 88 , spazio grigio , cool stuff or Francesca vidotto. Nancy got some fun to create a visual overlap , and metacomucation level to get some extra attention, and explain how a trained neural network can receive a message like multiple layer vpn.

[@skd181086]

Looking at a physical brain and trying to figure out how it works is perhaps the more difficult task than to find polinomial time algorithm for solving NP hard problem.

[@KIRNEILL]

Does anyone have course 3? Thank you for ye lectures btw! Nancy is awesome

[@KIRNEILL]

Nvm! It wasn’t recorded in notes! Got it!

[@FattyFPV]

I love this prof.

[@paul_to_the_music]

Great lecture! My question is: is an engineering approach best for these topics, or for evolution topics? I think it’s limiting.

[@jordanlee2009]

I was looking for a video on the brain i could sorta half watch while cooking. 3 videos later im 100% committed to this course 😂 im even goin elsewhere to find and watch the demos and such which have been cut from these videos, , and finding the papers referred to that have been given as reading material to the student Even better to know there are dozens of courses posted to this channel. Im guna have 5 theoretical degrees in a couple months 😂

[@ponte34]

I have been watching you For a while You have a problem to explain your point

[@whatshisname3304]

very interesting class, but is this a class aspiring to code or just to understand the brain.

[@Deborasantos-mk7oq]

This video does not have subtitles😕 it helped me so much with others.

[@anastasiafalcon4637]

This was particularly interesting for me as someone who is bad at recognizing faces. Not the worst end of the spectrum, but still quite awkward + bad vision. I also know some people who are super-recognizers, and yes, they say they have to hide it not to come off as creepy 😂

[@VinBhaskara_]

About the face features. It's also possible that the brain fine-tunes its feature extraction for faces on the distribution of faces it is exposed to most of the times. Ex. if you were to move to a different country where the structures of faces initially feels very similar, your brain would probably start look for novel discriminative features that it did not learn before. So, if that adaptation is considered, then probably it is some high level feature extraction that is really allowing us to distinguish faces? (As opposed to storing template of some sort).

[@ukkepukkie2882]

Im new to the subject so im just speculating, but I think we write the code as we are looking at the face longer, maybe using a different more general code at first. Upon meeting people I sometimes think two people look alike but then after some time they absolutely don’t. With twins, it takes a long time but eventually you can easily see the differences. Im Dutch but I didnt recognize the politicians as I was still a child back then. I only saw two people when paying attention and when time ran out I assumed it would be 3 or 4 people based on hair differences. Im wondering if my subconscious mind had seen these people before and made it easier for me. One of the two guys had a very distinctive nose for me that popped up throughout the figure.

[@josephreed8047]

I enjoy this but i am on the side of I know whats in the box befor the box even got to where it is to be filled with whatever is in there am i going to tell you or myself not likely. :)

[@nhaz652]

Thank you for this.

[@brucesuchman1253]

Ok so the face recognition somewhere near 44 min. I answered 2, and this blew my mind. The picture I didn't think was up long enough. Almost Instantly I went from unknown number to less than 10 and less than 4. I know I consciously only scanned the top two rows. I only did more than a scan with the left most 3 or 4 on top row and second row. In the time the picture was on screen I had narrowed it down to two. Not having enough conscious time to focus on each picture. I thought there was no way there is only two, maybe there's more. And the experiment ended.

[@hikari7722]

the same answer

[@sherry8444]

I guessed it was "one" dutch politician within a second. Not because I'm good with faces but because I knew it would be another sneaky trick! After a few more seconds I thought to myself "possibly two" because they would try throw off the people who guess "one" by reasoning the way I did.

[@hikari7722]

в эксперименте про узнавание по фото мне вообще сначала показалось, что там везде один человек... потом вроде заметила непохожую фотку и решила, что максимум их 2. но я так и не поняла, угадала я или нет

[@bloodypommelstudios7144]

I'm guessing "2% routinely fail to recognize family members" means in a clinical setting rather than real world scenarios? If the latter I would expect a slight correlation with IQ since IQ would probably correlate with ability to rapidly use other identifying features and context to figure out who someone is.

[@pulkityogi-jf1xk]

any time is it

[@elenagimpel7433]

Thank you so much!

[@Justahumanunderthesky]

Great series but there are so many pre-assumptions , so many conclusions that don't have enough justification... Maybe I just need to go to university

[@terencenxumalo1159]

good work

[@ergobenchlab-linhazugi2320]

Or the nature of the mind is different of the nature of the brain... Just point out about questioning and compering to machines for engeneering systems.

[@qutybahahmedabd7552]

Good explanation 👏 👍 👌

[@garden_0831]

mit 저런 질문 문화 너무 부럽다..

[@charlesbrightman4237]

Consider the following: Language, the very thing we utilize to think thoughts and convey ideas. Un-named Concepts -> Given a Name (could be a sound, symbol, etc) -> With an attached meaning -> And maybe even other meanings depending upon context -> And maybe even other names with the same meaning. (Basically a Dictionary and a Thesaurus for a language). BUT: a. How exactly do we know for 100% certainty that we have all the un-named concepts that could ever be named? b. How exactly do we know for 100% certainty that the meanings we give named concepts are 100% correct? This is a part of the 'Great Unknown'.

[@jasonnguyen2299]

thank you

[@skybirdnomad]

20:32 my ego always takes a bit of a hit when I flunk one of these kinds of tests 💀