Slashdot Mirror
Brain-Implanted Chips Allow Control of Technology
Nilchii writes "The Guardian has an article about implanting electrodes in the brain, allowing paralyzed people to control various software-integrated devices, such as the cursor on a computer and the channel and volume of his television. From the article: 'The experiment took place a few months ago as part of a broader trial into what are known in the business as brain-computer interfaces. Although it is early days, aficionados of the technology see a world where brain implants return ability to those with disability, allowing them to control all manner of devices by thought alone.'" The BBC has coverage of this as well, and we've mentioned this research before.
These first chips are just "neural output" devices. They're very exciting - we've crossed the watershed to real bionics. But they're "write only" devices, like printers. Which is at odds with actual neural function, which includes feedback at every turn. Neural input feedback will make these devices more accurate and useable (by anyone). And the numb appendages we use while working on that next breakthru will probably make us more neurotic. Here's to escalating the modern condition!
--
make install -not war
At the moment, implants are the only way to get the precision required to do anything accurately.
Implants (ideally) try to isolate small clusters of neurons which, when firing, indicate some intention that would ordinarily be carried out through a connection to the motor neurons.
External sensors, say an EEG 'helmet', can't sense with the degree of precision required to get such a precise intention. You can, of course, make such a device that will respond to one of n states, where n is small, because the fluctuations in the field potential (or whatever else you're checking) could be segregated via machine learning algorithms into enough defineable states. But you can't do anything more precise.
The real promise of implants is that as they get smaller and as our filtering and understanding of neural coding (spatial AND temporal) gets better, you can differentiate many, many more 'intentions' with this sort of technology, so no longer are you limited to turning the volume up and down, but instead can select individual channels without scrolling up or down, program a time, etc. More abstract stuff.
For more information, check out some work by Nicolelis - I think it was mentioned on Slashdot a while back, and deals with Brain-Machine Interfaces and monkeys controlling robotic arms.
(Postscript: It might be possible at some point to use self-tuning neural networks and external sensors, but the training time would depend on the individual, the sensors would have to be far better than they are now, and the research into implants is of tremendous use aside from these 'cool' applications!)
The article does a great job surveying some of the major players in the field. I think all of the cited researchers have received grants from the NIH Neural Prosthesis Program.
As mentioned in the article, BCI research is proceeding along invasive, intra-cortical lines as well as more data-processing intensive EEG-based approaches. The latter methods affix EEG leads on the scalp, record brain waves, and employ powerful computer methods to decipher the results. Noise is a problem, so researchers have embraced the more invasive approach of implanting chips directly into the brain. That's what Cyberkinetics and Neural Signals are doing.
The Lab of Brain-Computer Interfaces, Technical University of Graz, has an active group researching BCI, both through EEG and implanted electrodes. I'm surprised they don't get more press. There's also interesting work going on at Anderson's Caltech lab using the posterior parietal cortex, which might have some advantages. Check out the nice slide show on their research.
There's also some companies that are looking into ways to lessen the amount of invasive procedures, but as of yet they're not mainstream AFAIK.
http://www.neurotechreports.com/pages/neurosurgery .html
From TFA:
"In January, Stereotaxis received FDA approval for its new Niobe Magnetic Navigation System, which uses computer-controlled magnets, positioned external to the body, to steer catheters and guidewires throughout the cardiovascular system. The system works with Siemens' Axiom Artis dFC digital fluoroscopy system, which is used to visualize the devices as they are navigated. Stereotaxis says the catheter delivery system may eventually be used to steer DBS electrodes to a precise location in the brain."
The only problem I see is your use of the Slippery Slope Logical Fallacy