The brain to computer interface

In a recent post I discussed the concept of establishing a protocol for machines to communicate with human brains.  The question I posed had to do with variances in our brain functions across individuals, and our brains filter systems that it uses to block certain kinds of information, i.e., a learning disorder, or even autism.

There is some progress being made in areas other than what the folks at uMind are doing. 

Engineers work on real-time control of artificial limbs

"A prosthesis revolution is under way, and a lot of the mechanical problems are getting solved," said Nitish Thakor, a professor of biomedical engineering at Johns Hopkins University, speaking at one of two workshops on neural systems. "Now the challenge is linking prosthetic devices to the nervous system to control them in a real-time fashion."

"The whole system of a prosthetic hand is a vast research area, with many fields involved," said Thakor. He described advances in algorithms that could let someone control basic functions, such as picking up a glass, with signals from an electroencephalogram (EEG) monitor worn on the scalp. Finer controls, such as playing a piano, would require a high-performance neural microarray sensor implanted in the brain-a development that's on the horizon, Thakor said. 

Thakor said his group has been able to achieve 99 percent accuracy in correlating the flexing of a single finger with signals from as few as 30 neurons in the M1 area of the brain's motor cortex. "But we will need to monitor many more neurons to manage more-complex tasks" and multiple fingers, he said.

A high performance neural microarray?  I wonder if you can pick one of those up at your local microarray store.  Ok, so we've found 30 neurons in the M1 area of the brain. And they 'monitor' the neuron.  I was doing fine until I read this:

Microarray developers need to find ways to reduce both damage to cells and the immune system when the arrays are inserted into brain tissue.

Yikes.  The whole idea of implanting a device in my skull that is connected to some electrodes that 'monitor' my neurons is really a turn off.  Why cant the neuron be monitored from outside my skull?  Maybe in the shape and style of a nice baseball cap?

One more line that I found interesting:

"There appears to be no specific linear correlation of signals to the flexion movement of multiple fingers. The data is all jumbled up," he said. "So my bias is to shift the problem to mathematical algorithms because the electrical problem is so daunting."

You see, understanding the language of the brain isn't the same as plugging in a RJ45 cable and speaking Ethernet.  In this communication medium there is no standard jack, and there is no standard protocol for sending messages, 'the data is all jumbled up'.  And on top of that, the 30 neurons that control my finger in the M1 area of my brain, may not be the same 30 neurons that control your finger.  Those 30 may control some other body part that would be really confused getting messages intended for a finger.

The answer to solving these brain protocol challenges lies in artificial intelligence (of course!).  We have spiders that can find and query every node on a global network, eventually we'll need the same kinds of spiders to crawl through and map biological neural nets. I would make them Nano Spiders (trademark Bob McGinley!).