Controlling Machines with Thought Alone

[Reaper]

I read an article by ScienceDaily which goes over the possibility of controlling robots and machines by thought alone. Of course, controlling computers via brain-computer interface is nothing new. But in this particular case, these people are exploring controlling a robot, whether it be an arm, or a humanoid one, UAV, etc. Also, invasive brain surgery would not be needed because an EGG would translate the brain signals into digital commands. This article deals mostly with control over a humanoid ones.

 

Here are some of the details:

 

"Objects available to be picked up are seen by the robot's camera and conveyed to the user's computer screen. Each object lights up randomly. When the person looks at the object that he or she wants to pick up and sees it suddenly brighten, the brain registers surprise. The computer detects this characteristic surprised pattern of brain activity and conveys the choice back to the robot, which then proceeds to pick up the selected object. A similar procedure is used to determine the user's choice of a destination once the object has been picked up."

 

(SOURCE: "Researchers Demonstrate Direct Brain Control of Humanoid Robot." Science Daily. 15 Dec. 2006. University of Washington. 10 July 2007 <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061215122519.htm>.'>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061215122519.htm>.)

 

The practical implications of this are huge. For one, a robot of this kind would be far more adaptive since a human is controlling it directly. Also, it would be possible to operate it in any location in the world via internet, and can be used in a variety of applications such as precision surgery.

 

Here is the article for more details: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061215122519.htm

 

What are your thoughts on this?

[bascule]

I think brain-computer interfaces are going to revolutionize the world. Since the dawn of man our conscious experience has been limited by what our senses have been able to observe and what tasks our bodies have been able to perform.

 

Brain-computer interfaces have the ability to blow away this barrier. With it comes the potential that our consciousness may literally expand outside our skulls, that we will be able to directly partake of information without some intermediary sensory translation interface, and that we will be able to directly elicit change in the outside world without involving muscle movement.

 

I reel at just the idea of a brain-computer interface that can replace the keyboard and mouse with thought alone. Once it becomes bidirectional all bets are off.

[foofighter]

mind/machine interfaces sound cool - i just wouldn't want a circuit to blow - that would require cutting open ur head every time, wouldn't it?

[someguy]

ya but do we really want cyborgs? at first i hated the idea just because it seemed unnatural but then i thought that it could be the best thing for mankind since we could achieve a whole new collective enlightenment by enhancing our minds and connecting them directly, but then i thought that the first thing this technology will be used for is warfare, well maybe not the first, the first would be for handicapped the second for warfare. and i don't like that idea much at all. but man i would love to be hooked up directly to whole orchestra or something, the cyborg musical instrument would be virtually limitless at least all the way until that last 90% of your brain is used up or whatever percentage it is that's not being used.

[bascule]

Sure hope you're not using a computer then (OH WAIT!). Alan Turing built the Bombe in order to crack the encryption on messages sent from Nazi command in order to help the Allies win the war.

 

And sure hope you're not using a microwave, with its magnetron originally designed to spot incoming aircraft from great distances

[cjohnso0]

A few years ago there was a show on The Discovery Channel that had a computer mouse pointer which was controlled by a human brain. I believe the gentleman controlling it had lost his arms, or at least the use of them. They plugged into the nerves that control arm / hand motion. It was very cool, I'll try to find a link somewhere, nothing on the first page of search results.

[swansont]

ya but do we really want cyborgs?

 

Anyone with a pacemaker, cochlear implant, etc. is technically a cyborg.

 

...that last 90% of your brain is used up or whatever percentage it is that's not being used.

 

Oh, let's not perpetuate that canard.

[Reaper]

mind/machine interfaces sound cool - i just wouldn't want a circuit to blow - that would require cutting open ur head every time, wouldn't it?

 

 

That would be a problem if the computer was implanted, but in this particular experiment it isn't. The guy has electrodes all over his head, so if a circuit blows, it shouldn't be too much of a problem, provided that his head isn't wet.

 

Brain-computer interfaces have the ability to blow away this barrier. With it comes the potential that our consciousness may literally expand outside our skulls, that we will be able to directly partake of information without some intermediary sensory translation interface, and that we will be able to directly elicit change in the outside world without involving muscle movement.

 

That's one of the goals of transhumanism. I don't think it is so much that consciousness will expand anywhere, but rather that information would be much more easily obtained, learned, or manipulated.

[blike]

Check this out. Watch till the end.

[Reaper]

Thanks for the video Blike. I liked it. It makes you wonder just how far we really are from the animals, given this monkey was smart enough to realize that he (she?) could control the machine with its own thoughts.

[someguy]

Anyone with a pacemaker, cochlear implant, etc. is technically a cyborg.

 

 

 

Oh, let's not perpetuate that canard.

 

ya i know what you mean about the cyborg but i meant it in the sense of adding features to the human being and not just replacing ones we have with artificial ones which is something slightly different but there's not really a better term to specify that. the thing is though by that same token you could argue someone in a wheelchair is a cyborg also, what's the difference if neurons firing directly control the chair or first control a hand that controls the chair. none really fro the standpoint of the brain. when they say that someone uses a tool like if it was an extension of their body they're not kidding. but still what i mean cyborg is different.

 

ya maybe it is a little duck like, but there is alot of potential of every brain that is not yet being used or else people would run out and just never be able to learn anything new. but if i'm not mistaken the neural net gets constructed as you go, so saying there are unused part of the brain would be imprecise even given that i guess.

 

it's one thing to be able to move a pointer on a screen, a similar yet slightly different thing to manipulate a couple of extra arms. but what about plugging in like a heat sensitive camera for instance? would you need to use either the new camera or your eyes? because if not wouldn't you need to layer the heat sensitive on top of your regular eyes? and if not, if you could have both at once.. then wouldn't you sort of need to be two consciousnesses? because, the mind seems only to be able to give it's attention to one thing at a time. do you think that this leap into cyborgism could change that and we could concentrate on more than one thing at a time? but then we would sort of be two people wouldn't we? i don't know.. some animals like chameleons i think can see independently from two eyes... i don't really know exactly what that means since i've never been a chameleon before though....

[theCPE]

I did a paper on BAI (brain-actuated interaction) that used an EEG (not sure what an egg machine is:)) just like the article you linked too.

 

These systems can either be invasive or non-invasive, with the non-invasive systems being more desired for the exact reason that a few people pointed out, no cutting you open!

 

No doubt being able to control robots, or even smaller more simple devices without the hands would be great, but these systems are FAR from that type of success, especially the non-invasive systems.

 

One specific study posted results of 30-40% command error. Meaning 30-40% of the time the command the person tried to give didn't produce the proper results. This error was present with even the simplest commands: Left, Right, Center. There were only three commands to distinquish and yet 40% error!!! The problem.....the EEG sensors on the head monitor large regions of the head and not actual neurons or even specific neuron clusters. Even with highly increased signal processing it would be very difficult to distinquish true commands (imagine 20-30 commands for a robot) from the limited sensing abilities.

 

In the experiments I read and (probably the one linked too here) the key to the apparent success of the test is the robot is automated and only requires suttle ques from the person mind controlling it.

[Reaper]

Well, the article didn't really go over the details of the experiment, given that it was geared toward the general audience.

 

But the reason non-invasive systems are being pursued, despite errors, is because you don't have to crack open the head and deal with those associated risks involved in brain surgery as you and others pointed out. It just so happens that you really can't just rip open a persons head and poke around where ever you like. Brain surgery is very risky, and in many cases the patients have to be conscious throughout the operation.

 

Regardless, brain-machine interface is a very exciting process, and within a few years we should see some very successful result just as soon as we fix the kinks in the system

 

I'm not terribly surprised that 40% errors can result, given that we really don't know enough about the brain.

 

BTW, can you provide to me the study you did on BAI? I would like to look at it.

 

Oh, and one more thing, the "EGG" machine was a mistake on my part. But I'm sure you knew I meant "EEG".