Bugs have some basic intelligence that makes scientists wonder whether bigger brains are better.

We don’t like insects.

Besides their annoying and sometimes dangerous bites, annoying habits of carrying all sorts of diseases and bizarre body plans that seem to be completely alien compared to our familiar tetrapod arrangement, they also seem to be everywhere, trying to sink their mouthparts into just about everything, from our food to our flesh.

And when we try to control their populations, they quickly evolve resistance to most of our chemical weapons and carry on as usual. Not even mass extinctions seem to bother them all that much.

But hey, at least they’re just little eating machines which function solely by instinct, right? Well, actually, it just so happens that scientists working with a number of insects found that bugs have some basic intelligence and their discoveries are making us question whether bigger is necessarily better when it comes to brainpower.

Usually when we think about intelligence, we think of primates and cetaceans with large brains teeming with between 85 and 200 billion neurons.

However, we’ve known for a while that not every neuron is necessary for consciousness and intelligent thought and only some circuits of the brain actually perform cognitive tasks.

So obviously, the bigger the brain, the more complex the cognitive circuits, the more elaborate the intellect and if whales had appendages could use tools the way we do, they’d be building interstellar spaceships by now as their immense intellects drove them to explore the universe, right?

Well, in one of nature’s curveballs, it turns out that things aren’t quite that simple.

Instead, large brains tend to have a lot of repetition of the same sets of neuron circuits. And that doesn’t necessarily equate to intelligence, since all those repetitions are now thought to be needed to increase the amount of control large animals like us have over our bodies by enabling much more processing for everything from fine motor skills to decision-making.

Kind of like a bigger computer designed to perform more tasks may need more memory and CPUs.

But a small organism doesn’t have so many cells to control and can fit some very elaborate mental circuitry in a pinhead-sized brain.

Several hundred neurons give the ability to count. A few thousand create sentient, and perhaps even sapient, thought. If that’s really the case, then it seems that we’re barking up the wrong tree with cognitive computing concepts and AI projects.

Instead of trying to simulate huge numbers of neurons, then bragging about it as a step towards emulating real brainpower, we should focus on those individual circuits and model the brains of insects rather than mammals.

The results won’t be a charming humanoid intellect of science fiction, but a working underpinning which can be used to build up more elaborate functions which we know exist in insects at some level, but not to the extent it’s present in our brains, like high-level abstraction.

It would be a much more feasible project, something that could possibly be done on a high-end laptop instead of giant and every expensive supercomputers. Still, there will be a big question of how much of a leap would need to be made between being able to count and recognize faces (something we can already program just about any robot to do), and performing complex analytical tasks.

This is where modeling an insect brain with just under a million neurons could help us by showing how these processes are done on a very fundamental level.

The next hurdle will be to determine whether we can take the results of our reconstructions and simulations and ramp them up. Regardless of whether we could do that or not, we may learn something about the evolution of intelligence.

Mainly, we can ask if arthropod cognition — or in this case we should say hexapod since we’re dealing with insects — is fundamentally different from cognition that evolved in chordates like us, or are all brains just different incarnations of the same thing?


  1. quindi, in sostanza, spostarsi dalla creazione di reti neurali artificiali basate sul funzionamento del cervello umano ad altre basate sul cervello degli insetti?

    mah mah

  2. si in sostanza si.. d’altra parte mi par una cosa migliore.. ora stan provando dal niente a creare una rete neurale simil-umana che è assurdo.. roba da mcgyver in pratica.. un approccio più “lento” secondo me sarebbe corretto. d’altra parte anche gli insetti fanno le loro piccole scelte

  3. beh in realtà le reti neurali artificiali non è che siano così assurde.. voglio dire, sono studiate in IA da un 20-30 anni e vengono utilizzate in molti campi. noi stessi al corso le abbiamo viste, anche se negli aspetti generali senza addentrarsi ovviamente..
    come ogni tecnica di questo tipo ha i suoi pregi e difetti, però ecco non è che sia fantascienza

  4. si chiaro ma per realizzare una cosa paragonabile al cervello umano, penso sia necessario partire dal piccolo.. questo dicevo..

Lascia un commento

Inserisci i tuoi dati qui sotto o clicca su un'icona per effettuare l'accesso:


Stai commentando usando il tuo account Chiudi sessione / Modifica )

Foto Twitter

Stai commentando usando il tuo account Twitter. Chiudi sessione / Modifica )

Foto di Facebook

Stai commentando usando il tuo account Facebook. Chiudi sessione / Modifica )

Google+ photo

Stai commentando usando il tuo account Google+. Chiudi sessione / Modifica )

Connessione a %s...