<p>There is a really close correspondence between <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auditory_scene_analysis" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Auditory Scene Analysis</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_auditory_scene_analysis" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Computational Auditory Scene Analysis</a>. If you tried to build a speech recognition system, especially for use in noisy environments, while ignoring what we know from auditory psychophysics, physiology, and anatomy, I would guess that you would not get too far. The things we have learned from CASA have lead to better hearing aids and cochlear implants, which in turn have taught us about the auditory system, which of course leads to further improvements in CASA.</p>

<p>Bregman has a nice summary (along with conferences) on his <a href="http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/Group2/abregm1/web/asacasa.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">webpage</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-13T18:44:53.643Z
2018-06-13T18:44:53.643Z
StrongBad
<p>What are the top contributions from neuroscience to artificial intelligence and viceversa? How much progress has been made from the interaction between these two fields? Is there a formal research area dedicated to the study of topics in the intersection between AI and neuroscience, with papers being published and maybe conferences being held periodically?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-13T07:50:42.710Z
You ask two questions: (1) top contributions, generalized as 'how much progress', (2) is there a a formal research area dedicated to this. My guess is, if you have an answer to (2), you might more easily do some initial research on (1) yourself. So, I suggest you focus this question on your second question. You can still ask the first follow-up question later, based on input on (2).
Steven Jeuris
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-14T06:00:41.187Z
Asking for "top contributions from **x**" or similar questions can be considered broad.  I would do as @StevenJeuris suggests and narrow the question to just asking what formal research area is dedicated to AI combined with neuroscience.
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-01T14:33:50.757Z
Closely related if not an exact duplicate: https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/6451/how-distantly-related-are-research-in-computational-neuroscience-and-neural-netw/
got trolled too much this week
<neuroscience><theoretical-neuroscience><artificial-intelligence>
What are the top contributions from neuroscience to AI and viceversa? How much progress has been made from the interaction between these two fields?
xwb
# What are the top contributions from neuroscience to AI and viceversa? How much progress has been made from the interaction between these two fields?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-06-13)

What are the top contributions from neuroscience to artificial intelligence and viceversa? How much progress has been made from the interaction between these two fields? Is there a formal research area dedicated to the study of topics in the intersection between AI and neuroscience, with papers being published and maybe conferences being held periodically?

**Tags:** neuroscience, theoretical-neuroscience, artificial-intelligence

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: You ask two questions: (1) top contributions, generalized as 'how much progress', (2) is there a a formal research area dedicated to this. My guess is, if you have an answer to (2), you might more easily do some initial research on (1) yourself. So, I suggest you focus this question on your second question. You can still ask the first follow-up question later, based on input on (2).  
> **username_2**: Asking for "top contributions from **x**" or similar questions can be considered broad.  I would do as @StevenJeuris suggests and narrow the question to just asking what formal research area is dedicated to AI combined with neuroscience.  
> **username_3**: Closely related if not an exact duplicate: https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/6451/how-distantly-related-are-research-in-computational-neuroscience-and-neural-netw/  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2018-06-13. Score: 2

There is a really close correspondence between [Auditory Scene Analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auditory_scene_analysis) and [Computational Auditory Scene Analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_auditory_scene_analysis). If you tried to build a speech recognition system, especially for use in noisy environments, while ignoring what we know from auditory psychophysics, physiology, and anatomy, I would guess that you would not get too far. The things we have learned from CASA have lead to better hearing aids and cochlear implants, which in turn have taught us about the auditory system, which of course leads to further improvements in CASA.

Bregman has a nice summary (along with conferences) on his [webpage](http://webpages.mcgill.ca/staff/Group2/abregm1/web/asacasa.htm)


---

