From: chadwell@utkvx3.utk.edu (Chadwell, Leonard)
Subject: Re: TECH: Neural Interfacing
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 15:45:00 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center


In article <1992Dec12.041658.16932@u.washington.edu>, dstampe@psych.toronto.edu (Dave Stampe) writes...

>There seems to be a lot on misinformation about neural connectivity
>going around, so let me add mine (B-{))
> 
>First, let's survey the techniques used so far: the up/down computers with 
>pattern recognition and scalp electrodes, multi-electrode EEG, direct
>cortical contacts, nerve interface chips, and high-resolution NMR.
> 
>The EEG and control computers use measurements from electrodes on the scalp,
>thus average millions (nearly billions!) of neurons' outputs.  This is 
>equivalent to debugging software by putting an AM radio next to your 
>computer keyboard and listening to the noise: it gives you clues but 
>nothing really detailed.  Even arrays of 40 or more electrodes do not
>help too much: they can indicate some underlying mental activity that
>involves large groups of neurons (alerting responses, preparation for
>movement, and so on) but don't show anything really fine.  Basically, the
>"control" systems that try to get simple commands from EEG rely on the
>subject to do something unnatural internally to produce a large enough 
>EEG response for the computer to pick up.  A simple one: blink your eyes.
>You can measure a pulse of alpha waves (10 Hz) in the occipital scalp area.  
>But then this is just 1 bit of information, and physically blinking your
>eyes is much easier to detect.
> 
[stuff deleted]

Sorry, Dave, but L. Pinneo at SRI DID use EEG systems to do cortical wave
pattern matching to qive qualified thought pattern detection.  Running on a PDP
in 1974, and a skull cap with electrodes (no shaving or such required), the 
cursor on screen could be issued 7 commmands by thought:  UP,DOWN,LEFT,RIGHT,
SLOW,FAST,STOP.  The main limitations on the system were the RAM (around 32K)
and the speed of the processor.  The commands were merely thought, and the 
system could accurately recognize the commands on 60% of the people who were
tested on the system, and with modification to pattern matching code, could 
also match those people.  With the progress made in raw computing power and 
memory capacity, more commands could be recognized with greater accuracy.

If ANYONE has contacts with or in Stanford Research Institute, please try to
get this projects information to me.  I have been unable to locate anything
else on this project.  It would be very useful.

CHADWELL@UTKVX.UTK.EDU