CES: X PRIZE Could Make Star Trek-Style Tricorder a Reality (Video)

In January, 2012, Slashdot carried a story about the launch of a $10 million X-Prize for Tricorder design. This year, at CES, Timothy Lord met Alan Zack, who works for the X PRIZE Foundation, and learned a little more about the Tricorder prize and what it's going to take to win it. "Ultimately," says the www.qualcommtricorderxprize.org page, "this tool will collect large volumes of data from ongoing measurement of health states through a combination of wireless sensors, imaging technologies, and portable, non-invasive laboratory replacements." If the success of the Ansari X PRIZE is any indication, it's a rational goal -- and the competition will be exciting to follow as it cranks up.

Comments

Remember the Android Tricorder app that CBS killed

[BlackSupra]

http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/11/09/02/2229200/android-tricorder-killed-by-cbs

http://web.archive.org/web/20120518031844/http://code.google.com/p/moonblink/wiki/Tricorder

Ultrasound

[chispito]

We have a newborn and I was a little frustrated how little data is obtained from a fetal ultrasound. Surely, with the right processing, a more accurate model could be constructed of a fetus/internal organs from these units? I don't think there's any way to fit an MRI or CT in the palm of your hand, but maybe a small ultrasound device?

Re:Ultrasound

[Frontier Owner]

I found the results of the ultrasound to by highly dependent on who the nurse. they look for gender, snap a couple shots and move you along. others spend time, take more pictures, and actually try to explain what your seeing. Ultimately, the imaging technology is there, its up to the person looking at it to understand what they are seeing.

Re:Ultrasound

[Dcnjoe60]

We have a newborn and I was a little frustrated how little data is obtained from a fetal ultrasound. Surely, with the right processing, a more accurate model could be constructed of a fetus/internal organs from these units? I don't think there's any way to fit an MRI or CT in the palm of your hand, but maybe a small ultrasound device?

If you had to have a c-section and they didn't have to stick a needle into your uterus to obtain amniotic fluid to determine if the baby's lungs were mature enough, you can thank your ultrasound. It's original purpose was to enable a trained practitioner to tell what was going on inside you (whether in the womb, or the heart, or where ever it was being used). It was never intended to provide the resolution of an MRI or CT scan, nor would those scans be beneficial in most pregnancies, unless there was the suspicion of something already being seriously wrong.

Fetal ultrasounds can be very detailed, of course, they are usually trans-vaginal then, instead of external and the patient has to be very still, just like for an MRI or CT scan (just not as long). As with an MRI or CT scan, it is really the image processing software that makes the image look so detailed. That software is usually not applied to an ultrasound, but has been for special images in the womb. But, when the purpose of the test is simply to determine how far along a pregnancy is, you usually aren't going to spend the extra thousands of dollars to produce those images.

As for small devices, because of how they work, it is unlikely that there will ever be small hand held MRI or CT scanners. There are smaller "open" MRIs instead of the big tube, but their images are much inferior to the full MRI machines. On the other hand, there already are small hand held ultrasounds. They can be used in the field to check for clots and obstructions very quickly. I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't even an "app" for that.

Re:Ultrasound

[gl4ss]

do you really want a 3d print of the fetus, like, REALLY? http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/8/3227461/3d-printing-fetus-japan-fasotec-hiroo-clinic

Re:Ultrasound

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think there's any way to fit an MRI or CT in the palm of your hand

Why does it have to? When they ask if you want to schedule an ultrasound, just say... "Screw that! We'd like an MRI and a CT, thank you!"

Re:Ultrasound

[claar]

Surely, with the right processing, a more accurate model could be constructed of a fetus/internal organs from these units?

Definitely an interesting possibility for a Tricorder.

3D ultrasounds are already being done, in real time. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_ultrasound -- we had one of these done. It mathematically combines the 2D images into a 3D representation. Building a full 3D model (internal and out) of the fetus seems very plausible.

While I found the 3D view extremely helpful (and it makes great printouts for the folks!), interestingly the ultrasound tech could "see" much better in the traditional 2D ultrasound view that looks like a fuzzy blur to non-techs. A big part of this besides her obvious training/experience was that the framerate of the 2D view was much higher.

Re:Ultrasound

[houbou]

The funny thing here is that while many would agree with you about your MRI statement, the same could be held true about cell phones, tablets, or lord knows what other inventions are out there. Always the same thing. It can't be done, and yet, eventually, they do get done, so, all you are doing is giving more fuel for those who will wholeheartedly want to prove you wrong. :)

Re:Ultrasound

[ColdWetDog]

the product is based on a digital model of the mother’s torso built from CT or MRI scans

I hope it's not done using CT (that's ionizing radiation folks, just at the precise time in an organism's life when you don't want to be exposed to ionizing radiation).

OTOH, maybe that explains, in part, the Japanese fascination for tentacle porn.

Re:Ultrasound

[Dcnjoe60]

I assume you mean my statement, but no, it cannot and never will be done. The very nature of how MRI and CT scans work will keep them from being hand held. For them to work, the body part being scanned needs to fit inside the device because the transmitter (whether magnetic or radiation) and the receiver need to be opposite each other (think of a traditional x-ray, the film has to be opposite the radiation source). CT would also need radiation shielding. Finally, both will need some heavy duty computer processing and some sort of high resolution screen to visualize the image on. Even with computers get smaller and smaller and screens getting higher and higher resolution, unless you are talking about a device that can only scan somebody's finger, it cannot and will never be hand held because the physics involved with how the device works precludes that. Will CT and MRI machines continue to get smaller than the room sized equipment of yesterday, yes. But they cannot become handsized, but they will always have to be larger than what they are trying to image. It's a matter of physics.

Re:Ultrasound

[drinkypoo]

Will CT and MRI machines continue to get smaller than the room sized equipment of yesterday, yes. But they cannot become handsized, but they will always have to be larger than what they are trying to image. It's a matter of physics.

That's what they said about X-Ray machines. Now they have portable backscatter rigs.

Re:Ultrasound

[Dcnjoe60]

Will CT and MRI machines continue to get smaller than the room sized equipment of yesterday, yes. But they cannot become handsized, but they will always have to be larger than what they are trying to image. It's a matter of physics.

That's what they said about X-Ray machines. Now they have portable backscatter rigs.

A backscatter x-ray device is not the same as a medical x-ray machine. Backscatter x-ray is low dose x-ray to detect metal, it is not a high dose, concetrated burst to pass through skin to detect bones and particularly fractures in bones. I doubt you would want to hold that in your hand, but maybe you would.

  Just because it uses x-rays doesn't make it the same thing. I have a welding magnet on my workbench, but that doesn't mean I have a portable MRI machine.

Re:Ultrasound

[drinkypoo]

A backscatter x-ray device is not the same as a medical x-ray machine.

That's what I said.

Sooner or later, they will have medical backscatter X-Ray. They'll figure out signal processing or something to make it useful.

Re:Ultrasound

[Dcnjoe60]

A backscatter x-ray device is not the same as a medical x-ray machine.

That's what I said.

Sooner or later, they will have medical backscatter X-Ray. They'll figure out signal processing or something to make it useful.

No, they won't. Just like a radar detector can use microwaves does not cook your food, nor does your microwave say how fast you are going, a backscatter x-ray cannot be used for medical imaging because the way it works is not precise, but relies on the x-rays bouncing around. There simply is not enough resolution at a dosage that would not be harmful. X-rays for medical use work like a camera. The x-ray is a focused beam, through a lens with the film or the ccd having to be at the correct focal length or the image is out of focus. The same is true with back scatter, because of the way it works, the beam is not focused in a way that would provide detail that could be used for medical diagnostics. This can be remedied by either increasing the amount of radiation (which would make it hazardous, like traditional x-rays) or narrowing the beam, effectively meaning it was no longer backscatter.x-ray, but instead traditional x-ray.

Put differently, just because two devices use a similar portion of the electromagnetic spectrum does not make them interchangeable. Backscatter x-ray and medical x-ray, both utilize the same portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Then again, so does a pulsar. However, none of them are interchangeable.

Only for health?

[jandar]

The standard Tricorder from ST was a general-purpose analyzer. The medical variant wasn't the main type.

Re:Only for health?

[gl4ss]

it was more of a magic stick.

http://www.qualcommtricorderxprize.org/files/qtxp.org/QTXP_Guidelines.pdf

I predict the winning solution will be a stillsuit that weights 5 pounds. (you need to come up with some medical breakthroughs or analyze pee, breath and other things at the same time).

Re:Only for health?

[Anonymous Coward]

The standard Tricorder from ST was a general-purpose analyzer. The medical variant wasn't the main type.

Also, I'm pretty sure that it was sort of a thin client device that uploaded processing and the tri-recordings to the main computer on the ship when it was in range, and it was in range if it was in orbit.

Re:Only for health?

[fatphil]

That's simple. One probe goes in your ear, one probe goes in your mouth, and one probe goes up your bum.

Nope, not that way round.

Re:Only for health?

[Nefarious Wheel]

"It's amazing what you can do with a simple salt shaker."
    -- DeForest Kelly

Re:Only for health?

[cb88]

Perhaps this is more what you are looking for... http://www.chemringds.com/Products/ChemicalDetection/JUNO1/ seeing as its affixed with a 1 there must be more advanced versions planned or already in the works.

Re:Will Africans win the prize?

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't create that!

- Comrade Obama

Biobed

[Dcnjoe60]

It seems the bio-bed would be the first step and much more practical. Once that was perfected, then a miniaturized (ie hand held) version would come along. Besides, at least for a bio-bed, you have to lie down on it. A tri-corder, somebody could scan you without your knowing (as evidence on several Star Trek episodes).

since star trek writer don't have to explain tech

[Anonymous Coward]

we only can imagine: may the thing use light (from infra to ultra spectrum), smell (and gas analysis), volumetrics (and mass), sound and various possibles methods not yet imagined...

Star Trek technomumbojumbo

[Thud457]

The Star Trek tricorder was in part informed by the ideas of Royal Rife where everything under the sun had a characteristic resonant radio frequency.
You could not only identify the virusiod that caused cancer, you should blast it with the right combination of frequencies so it would shake itself to bits like Ol' Galloping Gertie.

As Fort said, "It's steam engines when it's steam engine time". In the 20's and 30's, radio was all the rage. (Likewise, at the turn of the century, it was thought everything could be understood in terms of electricity. 1860's, steam engines.) These days, it's computators all the way down.

Registration fee

[schneidafunk]

Any reason they make this so difficult to enter?

"The Registration Fee is: between $5,000 and $25,000 USD, payable in U.S. Dollars only."

http://www.qualcommtricorderxprize.org/files/qtxp.org/QTXP_Guidelines.pdf

Re:Registration fee

[denzacar]

Probably to reduce the number of entries consisting only of a repackaged oximeter and a colorful video, going around and pillaging academic and other resources, taking up testing time and resources (they will need people with confirmed diagnoses to test the solutions on) and generally devaluing the reputation of the contest.

Basically, if you can't jump on this when the registration is only $5000, or can't accumulate $25000 later - you're probably not a serious contestant but a cook with a "3kord-R" sticker pasted on your TV remote.
Or a fraud, looking for gullible investors.

Tests performed

[schneidafunk]

The Core Set includes:
1. Anemia
2. Urinary tract infection, lower
3. Diabetes, type 2
4. Atrial fibrillation
5. Stroke
6. Sleep apnea, obstructive
7. Tuberculosis
8. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
9. Pneumonia
10. Otitis ("ear infection")
11. Leukocytosis
12. Hepatitis A
13. Absence of conditions

Re:Remember the Android Tricorder app that CBS kil

[Trogre]

Yep, and it still works great.

Side-loading wins again.

Interesting...

[gadget junkie]

Please, Lord, let me go through this!

Appalling

[Anonymous Coward]

How totally appropriate from an organization interested in shooting rich people to suborbital flights. "Medical assistance is pants, so get your own in the US of A from this machine I will sell you". It's pathetic. First I thought they had taken a turn into philanthropy, like helping the needed not die uncared for, but selfishness and greed is their driver.

Color me very uninterested.