05-09-2016, 12:58 PM
1452866443-braingateabs.docx (Size: 22.81 KB / Downloads: 6)
IJSR - INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH 45 Volume : 2 | Issue : 5 | May 2013 • ISSN No 2277 - 8179 Research Paper Volume : 2 | Issue : 5 | May 2013 • ISSN No 2277 - 8179 Research Paper Computer Science Kejal Chintan Vadza Asst. Prof. at Sutex Bank College of Computer Applications & Science, Amroli, Surat, Gujarat - 395009 ABSTRACT Brain Gate was developed by the bio-tech company Cyber kinetics in 2003 in conjunction with the Department of Neuroscience at Brown University. The device was designed to help those who have lost control of their limbs, or other bodily functions. The computer chip, which is implanted into the brain, monitors brain activity in the patient and converts the intention of the user into computer commands. Currently the chip uses 100 hair-thin electrodes that 'hear' neurons firing in specific areas of the brain, for example, the area that controls arm movement. The activities are translated into electrically charged signals and are then sent and decoded using a program, thus moving the arm. According to the Cyber kinetics' website, two patients have been implanted with the Brain Gate system. Brain Gate & Brain Computer Interface KEYWORDS : Brain Gate was developed by the bio-tech company Cyber kinetics in 2003 in conjunction with the Department of Neuroscience at Brown University. The device was designed to help those who have lost control of their limbs, or other bodily functions. The computer chip, which is implanted into the brain, monitors brain activity in the patient and converts the intention of the user into computer commands. Currently the chip uses 100 hair-thin electrodes that ‘hear’ neurons firing in specific areas of the brain, for example, the area that controls arm movement. The activities are translated into electrically charged signals and are then sent and decoded using a program, thus moving the arm. According to the Cyber kinetics’ website, two patients have been implanted with the Brain Gate system. The device was designed to help those who have lost control of their limbs, or other bodily functions, such as patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or spinal cord injury. The computer chip, which is implanted into the brain, monitors brain activity in the patient and converts the intention of the user into computer commands. Currently the chip uses 100 hair-thin electrodes that sense the electro-magnetic signature of neurons firing in specific areas of the brain, for example, the area that controls arm movement. The activity is translated into electrically charged signals and are then sent and decoded using a program, which can move either a robotic arm or a computer cursor. According to the Cyberkinetics’ website, three patients have been implanted with the BrainGate system. The company has confirmed that one patient (Matt Nagle) has a spinal cord injury, whilst another has advanced ALS. In addition to real-time analysis of neuron patterns to relay movement, the Braingate array is also capable of recording electrical data for later analysis. A potential use of this feature would be for a neurologist to study seizure patterns in a patient with epilepsy. Braingate is currently recruiting patients with a range of neuromuscular and neurodegenerative conditions for pilot clinical trials in the United States.The whole technique of this system based on mind uploading. Mind Uploading mind uploading (also occasionally referred to by other terms such as mind downloading, mind transfer, whole brain emulation, whole body emulation, or electronic transcendence) refers to the hypothetical transfer of a human mind to an artificial substrate, such as a computer simulation. Thinkers with a strongly mechanistic view of human intelligence (such as Marvin Minsky) or a strongly positive view of robot-human social integration (such as Hans Moravec and Ray Kurzweil) have openly speculated about the possibility and desirability of this. In the case where the mind is transferred into a computer, the subject would become a form of artificial intelligence, sometimes called an infomorph or “noömorph.” In a case where it is transferred into an artificial body, to which its consciousness is confined, it would also become a robot. In either case it might claim ordinary human rights, certainly if the consciousness within was feeling (or was doing a good job of simulating) as if it was the donor. Uploading consciousness into bodies created by robotic means is a goal of some in the artificial intelligence community. In the uploading scenario, the physical human brain does not move from its original body into a new robotic shell; rather, the consciousness is assumed to be recorded and/or transferred to a new robotic brain, which generates responses indistinguishable from the original organic brain. The idea of uploading human consciousness in this manner raises many philosophical questions which people may find interesting and disturbing, such as matters of individuality and the soul. Vitalists would say that uploading was a priori impossible. Many people also wonder if they were uploaded, would it be their sentience uploaded, or simply a copy? Even if uploading is theoretically possible, there is currently no technology capable of recording or describing mind states in the way imagined, and no one knows how much computational power or storage would be needed to simulate the activity of the mind inside a computer. Methods for Mind Uploading True mind uploading remains speculation: the technology to perform such a feat is not currently available. A number of methods have however, been suggested to carry out mind transfers in the future. i. Blue Brain Project ii. The immortality test project iii. Serial sectioning iv. Nanotechnology v. “Cyborging” vi. Brain imaging vii. Recreating Ethical issues of mind uploading There are many ethical issues concerning mind uploading. Viable mind uploading technology might challenge the ideas of human immortality, property rights, capitalism, human intelligence, an afterlife, and the abrahamic view of man as created in God’s image. These challenges often cannot be distinguished from those raised by all technologies that extend human technological control over human bodies, e.g. organ transplant. Perhaps the best way to explore such issues is to discover principles applicable to current bioethics problems, and question what would be permissible if they were applied consistently to a future technology. This points back to the role of science fiction in exploring such problems, as powerfully demonstrated in the 20th century by such works as Brave New World, Nineteen 46 IJSR - INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH Volume : 2 | Issue : 5 | May 2013 • ISSN No 2277 - 8179 Research Paper Volume : 2 | Issue : 5 | May 2013 • ISSN No 2277 - 8179 Research Paper Eighty-Four, Dune and Star Trek, each of which frame current ethical problems in a future environment where those have come to dominate the society. Another issue with mind uploading is the question as to whether an uploaded mind is really the “same” sentience, or simply an exact copy with the same memories and personality. Although this difference would be undetectable to an external observer (and the upload itself would probably be unable to tell), it could mean that uploading a mind would actually kill it and replace it with a clone. Some people would be unwilling to upload themselves for this reason. If their sentience is deactivated even for a nanecond, they assert, it is permanently wiped out. Some more gradual methods may avoid this problem by keeping the uploaded sentience functioning throughout the procedure. To control all singnals passed through mind into computer, we need one Interface. We known this interface as “Brain Computer Interface”. Brain Computer Interface: A brain–computer interface (BCI), sometimes called a direct neural interface or a brain–machine interface, is a direct communication pathway between a brain and an external device. BCIs are often aimed at assisting, augmenting or repairing human cognitive or sensory-motor functions. Research on BCIs began in the 1970s at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) under a grant from the National Science Foundation, followed by a contract from DARPA. The papers published after this research also mark the first appearance of the expression brain–computer interface in scientific literature. The field of BCI has since blossomed spectacularly, mostly toward neuroprosthetics applications that aim at restoring damaged hearing, sight and movement. Thanks to the remarkable cortical plasticity of the brain, signals from implanted prostheses can, after adaptation, be handled by the brain like natural sensor or effector channels.[3] Following years of animal experimentation, the first neuroprosthetic devices implanted in humans appeared in the mid-nineties. BCI versus neuroprosthetics Neuroprosthetics is an area of neuroscience concerned with neural prostheses—using artificial devices to replace the function of impaired nervous systems or sensory organs. The most widely used neuroprosthetic device is the cochlear implant, which, as of 2006, has been implanted in approximately 100,000 people worldwide.[4] There are also several neuroprosthetic devices that aim to restore vision, including retinal implants. The differences between BCIs and neuroprosthetics are mostly in the ways the terms are used: neuroprosthetics typically connect the nervous system to a device, whereas BCIs usually connect the brain (or nervous system) with a computer system. Practical neuroprosthetics can be linked to any part of the nervous system—for example, peripheral nerves—while the term “BCI” usually designates a narrower class of systems which interface with the central nervous system. The terms are sometimes used interchangeably, and for good reason. Neuroprosthetics and BCIs seek to achieve the same aims, such as restoring sight, hearing, movement, ability to communicate, and even cognitive function. Both use similar experimental methods and surgical techniques. Animal BCI research Rats implanted with BCIs in Theodore Berger’s experimentsSeveral laboratories have managed to record signals from monkey and rat cerebral cortices in order to operate BCIs to carry out movement. Monkeys have navigated computer cursors on screen and commanded robotic arms to perform simple tasks simply by thinking about the task and without any motor output. In May 2008 photographs that showed a monkey operating a robotic arm with its mind at the Pittsburgh University Medical Center were published in a number of well known science journals and magazines.Other research on cats has decoded visual signals. Early work The operant conditioning studies of Fetz and colleagues first demonstrated that monkeys could learn to control the deflection of a biofeedback meter arm with neural activity [7]. Such work in the 1970s established that monkeys could quickly learn to voluntarily control the firing rates of individual and multiple neurons in the primary motor cortex if they were rewarded for generating appropriate patterns of neural activity. [8] Monkey operating a robotic arm with brain–computer interfacing Studies that developed algorithms to reconstruct movements from motor cortex neurons, which control movement, date back to the 1970s. In the 1980s, Apostolos Georgopoulos at Johns Hopkins University found a mathematical relationship between the electrical responses of single motor-cortex neurons in rhesus macaque monkeys and the direction that monkeys moved their arms (based on a cosine function). He also found that dispersed groups of neurons in different areas of the brain collectively controlled motor commands but was only able to record the firings of neurons in one area at a time because of technical limitations imposed by his equipment.[9] There has been rapid development in BCIs since the mid-1990s. [10] Several groups have been able to capture complex brain motor centre signals using recordings from neural ensembles (groups of neurons) and use these to control external devices, including research groups led by Richard Andersen, John Donoghue, Phillip Kennedy, Miguel Nicolelis, and Andrew Schwartz. Prominent research successes Phillip Kennedy and colleagues built the first intracortical brain–computer interface by implanting neurotrophic-cone electrodes into monkeys. Yang Dan and colleagues’ recordings of cat vision using a BCI implanted in the lateral geniculate nucleus (top row: original image; bottom row: recording) In 1999, researchers led by Yang Dan at University of California,