
Three people play a Tetris-like game using a brain-to-brain interface - prostoalex
https://www.washington.edu/news/2019/07/01/play-a-video-game-using-only-your-mind/
======
nabla9
[https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.08632](https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.08632)

If I understood the paper correctly, the results are totally unimpressive. The
experiment setting seems to me to be intentionally convoluted to sound
impressive. Like it's just creative bullshitting.

This is how it works:

(Edited after scribu corrected me)

1\. Senders make a decision by concentrating on flashing lights. They use EEG-
cap to capture difference in spectral power between light flashing 17Hz and 15
Hz using the Welch's method. The choice is difference averaged over several
epochs in 10-second period (must be very low paced game). Lots of signal
processing and averaging to get yes/no answer between bright 17Hz and 15Hz
visual signal from steady state visually evoked potentials.

2\. This one bit of information was then conveyed to the Receiver using TMS
using signal where 10 consecutive pulses is yes, absence of pulses is no.
Thresholds are well calibrated beforehand so that yes/no can transmitted.
Receivers gets TMS signal that is completely different from what Senders did.

~~~
scribu
The senders do NOT control the cursor by hand. From the paper:

> The Senders convey their decisions of "rotate" or "do not rotate" by
> controlling a horizontally moving cursor (Figure 8) using steady-state
> visually-evoked potentials (SSVEPs).

~~~
nabla9
It seems that you are correct. The cursor is moved by concentrating on the
lights.

------
pizza
> “We essentially ‘trick’ the neurons in the back of the brain to spread
> around the message that they have received signals from the eyes. Then
> participants have the sensation that bright arcs or objects suddenly appear
> in front of their eyes.”

Incredible. Also, the article mentions using a coil to stimulate the
receiver's brain. Is this some form of trans-cranial magnetic stimulation?

By the way, in case anyone wants to listen to a decent critical theory lecture
on neuralink-esque technologies, here's one by slavoj zizek
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38alQSKtVbA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38alQSKtVbA)

~~~
nvrspyx
Yeah from the image at the start of the article, it looks like they’re using
TMS. You can see the coil sticking out to the right behind the man facing the
camera. It’s attached to a blue arm.

Furthermore if you look to the right of the coil, there are 3 little silver
balls. These are coated in an IR-reflective layer (silver color) that are used
by a camera to track the position of the coil in 3D space. This is more than
likely a Localite system if anyone wants to look it up.

My guess is that the people had MRI scans, which were used to find the right
place to stimulate. The Localite system uses a pointer with another 3 balls
that is pointed at key positions of the head and then slid around the surface
of the head. The head also has its own 3-ball tracker. This allows the
Localite system to get an accurate reading of head size and positioning in 3D
space. This also allows the system to “place” the brain image from the MRI
inside the head. Then, using a screen, you get an augmented reality view of
the TMS coil and the brain relative to the head to get accurate positioning
and angle to place the coil.

The 3-ball tracker for the head was probably removed for the image, but you
can see it in the image further down in the article. You can also get a better
view of the TMS coil. You can also see the Localite system in action on the
monitors and the camera in the top right.

It’s really cool stuff.

~~~
egocodedinsol
Your description of the localization approach is accurate, but this system is
almost certainly Brainsight, given the screen shown in the image at the
bottom, the IR camera in that image, and the shape of the tracker arm.

The general approach is straightforward: MRIs are have real-world coordinates.
Anything on the head (TMS, EEG, a surgical instrument) also has real-world
coordinates. To co-register the two, you need to associate 1) markers at MRI
time 2) markers at TMS time.

Once you have that correspondence, you can position any other objects relative
to either one, like surgical instruments with reflective markers or TMS
systems or whatever.

~~~
nvrspyx
Looking at it again, you’re right. That isn’t Localite. I should’ve said
localization system instead. I’m not familiar with Brainsight and I haven’t
been involved with the research using Localite in a couple of years, so I
missed that.

------
stupidcar
The Neuralink presentation a few days ago made the important point that the
physics of neurons makes it impossible to read and/or write their state with
any kind of accuracy without getting very, very close to them.

As such, these kinds of completely non-invasive methods of interfacing with
the brain are a dead end. Barring breakthroughs in scanning technologies that
completely upend basic laws of physics, you will always be limited to a low-
bandwidth channel that only works by reading the crude, aggregate state of the
whole brain or a large area of it, and requires extensive training for
participants to learn how to send basic signals.

Since the limits here are hard physical ones, not ones that can be engineered
around, there's no way for this to be gradually refined into a more useful
system. It will ways be a hack. If we're going to produce high-bandwidth
brain-machine / brain-machine-brain interfaces that allow useful
collaboration, it's going to require getting inside the skull and getting up
close and personal with brain matter, whether we like it or not.

------
d--b
This is a little weird. Why would you use a Tetris like game for this? There
is only one bit sent.

It’s also quite hackish. To select yes or no, they have to look at some
flashing lights the scientists know are going to generate different patterns
in the brain. So it’s not like the guys are thinking “yes” and that’s being
transmitted.

Similarly the receiver’s brain is being stimulated kind of randomly by
electrical impulse.

It’s basically electrical communication but where the transmitter and receiver
are wired in unsual places in the brain...

~~~
nvrspyx
Of course it’s hackish. The technology is still somewhat rudimentary. They’re
stimulating the visual cortex and the only way to do that (or stimulate brain
areas in general) in a non-invasive way is using TMS, which isn’t “pinpoint”
accurate. It’s shooting a strong magnetic pulse to stimulate the surface of
the brain through the skull. Since TMS doesn’t have deep penetration for the
receiver and neither do the electrodes for the senders, they’re limited to
surface areas of the brain.

The places are not unusual.

In terms of the senders, it would probably have been easier to simply use an
eye tracking camera to gauge which one they were looking at, but it wouldn’t
have been “brain-to-brain”. We’re still a LONG ways off from telepathic-like
communication. We’re also a long ways from even picking up “yes” or “no”
signals from people’s thoughts. It’s still an important achievement
nonetheless to get such readings from the senders and to make such
manipulations to the receivers conscious visual perception, even if it’s not
measuring conscious thought or creating a specific image.

~~~
stinos
> _We’re also a long ways from even picking up “yes” or “no” signals from
> people’s thoughts_

Yes and no. No because even though the tech exists, it's not exactly ready for
the masses and doesn't work 100% and usually needs calibration and isn't
exactly comfortable to wear. Yes because technology allowing people to form
words on a computer by picking individual letters based on just EEG exists
already; so that's more then yes/no. Likewise there's the experiments to have
people move robot arms etc. (i.e like Neuralink from Musk, which isn't really
new). You can even already buy commercial games where you control a cursor on
the screen based on just 2 electrodes.

~~~
noir_lord
My understanding is that what musk is doing isn't new in the sense of novel
but new in the sense that he's pushed the refinement of the technology to the
outer envelope.

Which is a pattern with him (and a good one) in that he takes existing tech
and pushes it to the outer envelope, batteries, motors and rockets all existed
long before musk was born but he's done valuable and interesting things with
them.

Someone had to make a technology for for market.

~~~
stinos
_new in the sense that he 's pushed the refinement of the technology_

That's what I understood as well. For example there's a mutlitude of practical
problems with current in-brain electrodes, ranging from limits in the amount
of them, their lifetime, lifetime of connectors, surgeries being quite
difficult, possible problems with infections etc. None of them are extremely
hard to solve but it basically requires a ton of money being thrown at and
that seems to be Musk's plan, allowing to get like 3000 electrodes with the
preamp/digitizer stage implanted subcutaneously.

------
warent
"This is the first demonstration of ... a person being able to both receive
and send information to others using only their brain."

I'm completely blown away by the gravity of this achievement. This is a
somewhat unassuming article for one study among many, but yet here we have
something that, in my opinion, is essentially the equivalent of the discovery
of how to create fire, or the invention of iron. Of course it will likely take
many more decades at least before we can scale this and use it in a more
practical way. Nevertheless, maybe I'm being melodramatic but I really feel
like we have very clearly just entered into a new age as a civilization and
species.

~~~
innomatics
Melodramatic... perhaps. I don't see it as brain to brain. Eyes are clearly
required to stare at the yes or no pulses for the sender's.

Seems like an extremely low bandwidth way to digitise 'thoughts'.

Also a bit skeptical about the receipt of this single bit of information being
directly into the brain. Essentialy zapping part of the brain to cause a
perceived flash. It's and incredible gap still toward encoding something as
complex as a real thought.

------
dboat
I wouldn't want to be an early adopter for this type of technology. Even just
play old VR is still so new that we don't know what sort of effects prolonged
use will have on physiology and cognition, and direct stimulation of the
brain, a system whose precise functioning still seems so largely unknown to
us, seems all the more dangerous.

I feel that some day we will be able to comprehensively decode neural
communication but I would liken our current state to something like surgery in
the Victorian era. I wonder if these student volunteers see the situation
differently than I do, or if they are just that brave.

~~~
hnlmorg
VR really isn't new. It's quite literally been around a few decades. Longer if
you count devices like Sensorama[1] but the Oculus-style VR headsets that
we're familiar with now has been around since the 90s (albeit at a
significantly lower polygon count).

Plus there has been lots of research already about extended periods of altered
realities. From people living inside mock space capsules through to simple
experiments with people wearing special glasses[2]. Though granted I don't
know of any research regarding extended use Oculus-style VR for weeks / months
at a time, there have also been a lot of research regarding the use of such
technology and how it can alter our mental perceptions beyond what we visual
see (eg I cannot find a reference for this one but I did read research about
people using avatars of the opposite sex and how quickly people came to
register that was their pseudo-psyical body)

As an aside, this research reminds me a bit of Sword Art Online[3]. A Japanese
light novel (which has been ported to different formats from anime through to
computer games) and which is about "full dive" VR headsets.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensorama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensorama)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upside_down_goggles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upside_down_goggles)

[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Art_Online](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Art_Online)

------
bin0
Look at Neurable, they've been around for years:
[http://neurable.com/](http://neurable.com/)

Tech is pretty good, and they're working on a VR headset which works with
games. If you talk to the founder, his story is really interesting. He has an
uncle who was crippled in a trucking accident, and his end goal is to create a
version of this which can help cripples regain mobility. He's using games as
his beachhead market to get traction, proof, a chance to iterate, $$$, etc.
Pretty inspiring stuff, and "social-conscience" investing done right, in my
opinion.

------
kuprel
Looks like OpenBCI hardware:
[https://shop.openbci.com/collections/frontpage/eeg](https://shop.openbci.com/collections/frontpage/eeg)

------
mfbx9da4
This is fine but doesn't present any jumps in technology. It's still just EEG.
The electrical stimulation sounds pretty dangerous as it's non invasive so
must have a pretty large stimulation zone.

