[HN Gopher] Coupled Oscillators for Computing (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Coupled Oscillators for Computing (2020)
        
       Author : nickpsecurity
       Score  : 39 points
       Date   : 2024-09-10 13:53 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (pubs.aip.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (pubs.aip.org)
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | That's fascinating. I've fooled around with coupled oscillators,
       | using 555 timers, and seen how little coupling is needed to get
       | synchronization. And that you can synchronize at 2:1 or other
       | ratios, although not as easily as 1:1.
       | 
       | The new idea here is that you can have coupled oscillators
       | running at very different frequencies, and only the ones that are
       | close in frequency will couple. So it's sort of like frequency-
       | division multiplexing, or radio. In a radio receiver, there's
       | only one time-varying voltage coming in, but in that one number
       | is the entire spectrum. So this offers the possibility of
       | connecting some large number of elements without a large number
       | of interconnects.
       | 
       | It takes a lot of cycles to do anything with phase locked
       | systems. Maybe. There are efficient modulation strategies.
       | 
       | It's a new way to think about analog computing. Not clear if it's
       | better.
       | 
       | If biological brains were doing this, researchers should be
       | seeing far more high-frequency activity than is actually
       | observed. There's speculation that something in biological
       | neurons ought to be going fast, because brains seem to get more
       | done than ought to be possible with such slow signals. So far,
       | nobody has found that. EEG measurements, even at the single
       | neuron level, seem to be below 30 Hz. There was an article on HN
       | a few weeks ago with speculation that something optical was going
       | on. But it was just speculation.
        
         | kragen wrote:
         | yeah, if memory serves, the 2:1 coupling is how the parametron
         | mentioned in the article works; given a reference frequency
         | signal such as 6 gigahertz and some oscillators that can
         | oscillate around 3 gigahertz, you have two possible frequency-
         | locked phases that can serve as 1 and 0. one of the half-
         | frequency oscillators serves as a phase reference for the 1
         | level and everything else is measured relative to it
         | 
         | hmm, now i see that the article explains this, but i guess i'll
         | leave this here as a simplified summary in case that it's
         | useful to somebody
        
         | dr_dshiv wrote:
         | There are a lot of high frequency electrical patterns in the
         | brain. Individual neurons have a max frequency of less than
         | 200hz (most less than 100hz), but volleys of neural populations
         | can phase lock to much higher frequencies. The hair cells in
         | the ear phase lock to sounds up to 8000hz-- this is followed by
         | phase locking in the auditory nerve and further has been
         | followed all the way to cortical synchronization. In humans
         | only measured up to 1200hz in cortex with EEG, but this seems
         | to be a measurement challenge. High frequency neuroscience has
         | a big measurement challenge, actually. Very expensive.
         | 
         | If you are interested in topics like coupled oscillators,
         | synchrony and entrainment, I cowrote a paper that you may
         | enjoy. We cite the OP (2020).
         | 
         | https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neurorobotics/articles/...
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | thank you very much for sharing this!
        
       | kragen wrote:
       | in the 01950s the parametron was one of many approaches being
       | considered for computing at microwave frequencies; it's kind of
       | amazing that it took until the 01980s for microwave computing to
       | realize its potential, and then by way of conventional 'level-
       | based' combinationial logic and flip-flops rather than through
       | oscillator-based computing
        
         | Vecr wrote:
         | If we could compute faster we'd be able to do digital visible
         | light interferometry, but for now we're stuck with lenses and
         | mirrors bolted to heavy tables, and our telescopes have to be
         | very close together.
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | well, i can see best around 540 terahertz, so i think you'd
           | need digital state transition rates around a couple petahertz
           | for digital visible light interferometry, about six orders of
           | magnitude faster than this cellphone. that's clearly
           | physically possible, but one or another technology might be
           | able to compute much faster than this cellphone while topping
           | out in the low terahertz
           | 
           | such speeds would likely require that most bit operations be
           | reversible to avoid vaporizing due to landauer's limit
           | (perhaps coincidentally also first proposed by von neumann)
        
           | fanf2 wrote:
           | We would also need an optical atomic clock at each receiver
           | in order to have enough time resolution to correlate the
           | signals correctly. A few optical clocks exist but they are
           | still highly experimental.
        
             | kragen wrote:
             | maybe you could just send a reference light beam between
             | the receivers over an optical fiber to provide a phase
             | reference?
        
               | Vecr wrote:
               | The dream would be a planet-sized optical telescope, but
               | even a European country sized 'scope would have trouble
               | with your idea.
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | people already send light beams over ocean-length optical
               | fibers (that's how we're talking). this is achieved by
               | the use of erbium-doped fiber amplifiers, which preserve
               | wavelength and phase information, but even without
               | amplification you can reach 500 km:
               | https://phys.org/news/2023-06-scientists-km-quantum-
               | key.html
               | 
               | and of course we're only talking about these rube
               | goldberg setups because we're perversely trying to build
               | a telescope with a giant rock in the middle of it. if we
               | build the telescope in solar orbit, we can just shine a
               | light through space for the phase reference
        
       | bob1029 wrote:
       | > Spiking neural networks use oscillators for generating the
       | signals but do not take advantage of the nonlinear interaction
       | between oscillators, and so most of them do not belong to OBCs as
       | we defined them.
       | 
       | I don't know if I share this view. The interaction between
       | oscillators in a SNN is indirect but certainly non-linear by way
       | of the network elements and how they process information.
       | 
       | I would think of STDP like a biological form of injection
       | locking.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-14 23:02 UTC)