Japanese Scientists Claim To Reconstruct Images From Brain Data 276
In a world first, a research group in Kyoto Japan has succeeded in processing and displaying optically received images directly from the human brain. Here's the Japanese press release for good measure. One step closer to broadcasting your dreams? The research is due to be published today in the US scientific journal Neuron
Predictably (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You mean "The subject was an underpaid, overworked grad student/postdoc, and the image was 'NEURON' in a blatant example of pandering to a specific high-impact journal to increase the likelyhood of acceptance."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dreaming Is A Private Thing (Score:3, Interesting)
And once again Isaac Asimov predicted this [wikipedia.org].
Re:Dreaming Is A Private Thing (Score:4, Insightful)
No he did not.
He wrote a story about something like this. People ahve thought about doing this for years.
There is a difference in predicting something, and writing a story.
He also wrote about a bunch of stuff that never happens, and won't likely happen.
I like the mans work, but come on if he gets put any higher on a pedestal he'll be able to touch the moon.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe that's how we'll get a space elevator?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm still waiting for Sally [wikipedia.org]; that story was set in the year 2120. I'm still waiting for R. Daneel as well.
As to writing about stuff that never happened, THIS never happened - until now. The "hyperdrive" (what Roddenberry renamed "warp drive") was never invented - yet. Roddenberry and his writers were prescient, too. I remember a world without cell phones, flat screen talking computers, self-opening doors, and space shuttles (I remember a world without space travel at all).
I merely mention Asimov because I t
Re: (Score:2)
Not functionally different from the ancient concept of "the gods told me in a dream". Insert tech, remove gods, what do you have? :)
Re:Dreaming Is A Private Thing (Score:5, Funny)
As to writing about stuff that never happened, THIS never happened - until now. The "hyperdrive" (what Roddenberry renamed "warp drive") was never invented - yet. Roddenberry and his writers were prescient, too. I remember a world without cell phones, flat screen talking computers, self-opening doors, and space shuttles (I remember a world without space travel at all).
Wow. Your UID should have a minus sign in front of it.
Re: (Score:2)
The one thing I can think of that his crystal balls got wrong was Multivac, yet with its "terminals in every home and business" it was the closest of any pre-internet science fiction story I ever read to predicting the internet.
Check out Murray Leinster's "A Logic Named Joe" from 1946. I think that was a lot closer. Computers, not terminals (he called them "Logics") in every home, all networked together.
He was really off with the concept that the Internet would be a public utility that restricted what sorts of questions you were permitted to ask - but the UK and Australia are going that way, China's already there. And who knows what the next administration will do?
I believe I recall that there weren't central servers; it was
Re:Dreaming Is A Private Thing (Score:4, Informative)
I looked it up on wikipedia [wikipedia.org] and found that A Logic Named Joe [baen.com] is posted on the internet, with a link from wikipedia.
It appears that Leinster beat Asimov to the punch; it's possible, being a science fiction fan before he was a science fiction writer, that Asimov even read "Joe". Wikipedia puts "Joe" at 1946, but Multivac in 1955 [wikipedia.org].
Re:Dreaming Is A Private Thing (Score:4, Funny)
He can probably already touch the moon. Don't you know your Vonegut?
Isaac's in heaven now.
I assume that Asimov got to tag the moon on his way by. Best speech opening ever.
Re:Dreaming Is A Private Thing (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry - If you don't recognize the quote and have no context, it's not funny at all.
Vonnegut [wikipedia.org] (misspelled in my post above) became honorary president of the American Humanist Association [wikipedia.org] after Isaac Asimov [wikipedia.org], their former president, passed on. As such, he had the somewhat awkward honor of addressing the Association at their first meeting after losing their president and had to come up with some way to say goodbye to Isaac and start his speech. (If you're unfamiliar with Humanism [wikipedia.org], it's an entirely human-based religion/philosophy. Its members are largely atheist or agnostic and practice strict scientific skepticism while shunning religious superstitions or unsupported beliefs - Heaven/Hell included. The idea that Asimov, as president of the AHA, would have any literal belief in Heaven would be ludicrous.)
According to Vonnegut, opening his speech with
Isaac's in heaven now.
not only did a great job of breaking the ice in a very awkward situation, but set the entire ball-room laughing out loud.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He predicted that people will overplay their discoveries and promise far more than they can deliver?
This thing is not going to be reading any dreams any time soon.
Quick.. (Score:2, Funny)
No more lack of artistic skills for me (Score:5, Interesting)
I have lots of cool images in my head for comics and wallpaper, however I lack the artistic talent to bring those images from my mind to paper/photoshop. Maybe soon I will be able to compensate for my lack of artistic ability.
Re:No more lack of artistic skills for me (Score:5, Interesting)
Direct Mind-Picture System (Score:2)
I think a direct mind-picture system would constitute a new artistic medium, with it's own advantages and drawbacks. There would still be a learning curve, and traditional drawing/painting skills would no doubt assist the artist. You might also combine the forms to touchup the captured mental images using more traditional methods.
Alternatively one might use it in the manner of a camera. Things would get most interesting when we learn to directly pipe these experiences into another person's mind...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No more lack of artistic skills for me (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a memory from my childhood that I can almost recall at will, at almost any time. When I was 6, my father took me on a week long canoeing trip. I remember standing on a road, looking through some trees down to the river onto some cool rapids which we were about to go down. I can see in my mind what seems to be a perfect picture: the side of the road, the wooded slope covered with dry leaves, trees, and the river. It seems that I could just sit down a draw the scene from my memory. The funny thing is, every time I try to focus on some detail, for example when try to identify the trees, or look at a number on a mile-post next to the road, or something like that, the whole picture completely disappears, and I have hard time recalling it again. The details are simply not there at all.
Now if I were to draw the scene, I would undoubtedly substitute some sort of simplified shapes, or maybe just a pattern of shades of green, for the leaves. But you could look at the details of the drawing and see how it was done. You probably would be unable to identify the trees by their leaves, the drawing would not contain that much details, but you would be able to see the way the image is rendered on paper. I cannot do that with the mental image. I believe that in my mind I am able to render the overall image without actually rendering the details at all, not even as some sort of impressionist jumble of colors and shades. If that's the case, transferring this image onto paper would require filling in all the details in some way, which, IMHO, is exactly the hard part of drawing or painting.
Emacs Macro! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Likewise it would be nifty (and probably scary at times) to be able to record my dreams and view them later, just like I would any other movie.
Aside from the obvious YouTube flooding (since most will be kark), I foresee a market for such things, and the potential to make a living from "lucid dreaming".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
a research group in Kyoto Prefecture has succeeded in processing and displaying optically received images directly from the human brain.
Images you acquire optically follow a very different path from dreams or "mind pictures". The former aren't really detailled pictures, they are visual concepts that cannot be cast into a bitmap without interpretation. If we were to talk about the last dream you have made of a human, I could convince you that their hairs were of one or either color using suggestion techniques.
Re: (Score:2)
You obviously have a hard time picturing scenes and objects in your mind. Some of us have the ability to picture a 3D model of something and manipulate it on the fly. If we could get that information to other people it would be truly amazing.
Kinda neat, not that exciting though (Score:4, Interesting)
The visual cortex is one of the more understood areas of the brain, and decoding V1/V2 is low-hanging fruit. To the extent that memory and dreams back-project to these areas, perhaps recording parts of these experiences would be possible.
Making this practical and inexpensive would be quite a practical breakthrough though - imagine being able to imagine something and import it into GIMP from a headband. Doing this through MRI would be impractical unless someone would be able to keep the image stable in their head for long enough for a high resolution scan of the area (and bear the ~$700/hour cost of MRI).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The visual cortex is fairly well understood from electrical, fMRI and optical studies in animals. A PI with an office about ten feet from mine did some work in mapping the visual cortex with fMRI and one of my favourite slides to show is a basis function from a particular transform side-by-side with the spatial sensitivity pattern measured from a neuron in a cat.
There might be some interesting results if they can manage to look at imagination and dreams, but those are tougher subjects.
Re:Kinda neat, not that exciting though (Score:5, Insightful)
Can we "keep images in our heads" at all? When I try to, it is more of a feeling than an image, and it's a fragmentary one at that. Wouldn't it make sense if our imagination worked a lot like our vision, i.e. we can only focus on small bits of the visual field at once, and so would only be able to imagine those pieces and attributes of an image pertinent to our needs or wants?
I'm free-balling here, mind. I can't seem to put coherent, complete images in my head, but others very well might.
Re:Kinda neat, not that exciting though (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Y'all are doing pretty well. I'd imagine that if they could project what's going on in my brain onto a CRT, it would be indistinguishable from tuning between channels and watching snow.
An artist I am not.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone's brain is different. Some people are more oriented to vision, some to abstract concepts, others to sounds, etc. I'm visually oriented, but somewhat lacking in abstract thinking.
When I read a well written novel I'm THERE. I see, visually, what the writer describes. No doubt you're much better at math than I am.
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible that the image is there, even though you are not consciously aware of it. The nature of consciousness is still poorly understood, but a great deal of what we can be conscious of usually occurs subconsciously.
What is known is that conscious awareness generally occurs after the event, and is "post-dated" by the memory system. I saw a study on runners that showed that they reacted to a starting gun several hundred milliseconds before they were aware the gun had fired, but rememb
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Having a device like this, you might be able to learn how to hold an image in your head. If it could give you instant feedback, perhaps you can learn it like any other skill.
So the existence of the device, over time, could change the answer to your question.
Re:Kinda neat, not that exciting though (Score:5, Funny)
And imagine spending the next week try to figure out GIMP to be able to do anything with it~
Re:Kinda neat, not that exciting though (Score:4, Informative)
[i]The visual cortex is one of the more understood areas of the brain, and decoding V1/V2 is low-hanging fruit.[/i]
Low-hanging fruit? I agree, it's fairly well understood, but given the pre-processing that happens in the retinal ganglion cells, and the kind of data that actually ends up getting to V1 (after being relayed from the LGN), I'm surprised an actual image can be reconstructed from the information. After all, the RGCs tend to pass on things like movement, edges, contrast and color, but it's not even remotely pixel by pixel type data, which is precisely the informaiton that gets passed on to V1.
Since it's coming from an fMRI, there's no way the image can be very detailed. I suspect it will be very low resolution.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The images they used were very high contrast (black and white) and quite simple - squares, lines, crosses, etc. It's not really surprising you can reconstruct that sort of data from the visual cortex. Still, very cool. The paper is worth a look.
I'll be really impressed when someone reconstructs a recognizable non-synthetic image. Oh, and how colour is represented.
Does it get lonely up in your crystal tower? (Score:5, Insightful)
"The current accomplishment is low hanging fruit and therefore uninteresting. Surprising, really, that they found funding for such an unnecessary demonstration at all! By commercializing this technology, it would become sufficiently interesting to deserve my royal approval."
Belittling humanity's incremental advancement as if you're a third party, how's that working out for you?
I think it's tremendously exciting. Thanks for the buzzkill though, it reminds me to get off the computer and interact with people of my choosing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"low-hanging fruit"
Monkey steals the peach!
Re: (Score:2)
bear in mind that this was published in Japan where MRI Scans are 100 bucks and are not billed by the hour:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/interviews/ikegami.html [pbs.org]
No pictures? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this is the first time I can scientifically say, "Pics or it didn't happen."
For the last time... (Score:5, Informative)
People read blurby summaries, which don't include the results, the full reasoning, methods, etc, and then act as if it's the fault of the researchers. It's absurd, that's neither the paper nor the direct work of the researchers, it's some non-scientist working for a news source. Read the actual paper, TFA in these cases are rarely any better than TFS.
http://download.cell.com/neuron/pdf/PIIS0896627308009586.pdf [cell.com]
There's the PDF. It does have the very pixelated images. I haven't had time to read through it.
As always, don't complain to me if you don't happen to have a subscription, and not having a subscription is no reason to act as if the results aren't real.
Re:No pictures? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It was a nude Mike Huckabee.
Pixels (Score:2, Funny)
In the recent experiment, the research group asked two people to look at 440 different still images one by one on a 100-pixel screen. Each of the images comprised random gray sections and flashing sections.
100 pixels? Sounds like they were watching japanese porn...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Random gray sections and flashing sections? Definitely Japanese porn.
This is NOT new (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, it is (Score:5, Informative)
Didn't read the full article, but from the abstract
The article you linked to seems to only be able to tell which object a person saw from their fMRI. I believe it required established measurements too, IE "this part of the brain lights up when they see a face. In blind studies, that part of the brain lit up, so they must have seen a face."
Whether it required a calibration for each individual or not, no image reconstruction was done: it's not the same thing at all.
Thanks for the link (Score:2, Insightful)
I just skimmed both papers, looks like the Japanese group goes well beyond what they did at Berkeley, capturing true images, whereas the Berkeley group only found some evidence that this would be possible.
World first? I think not! (Score:5, Funny)
THEY have been able to do this for decades! Where is your tinfoil hat now? Ha!
Beginning of the end for me (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In all likely, you will find out your not nearly the perv you though you are.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Either way you're right, considering the thoughts I have, I definitely don't want to see what everyone else is thinking about.
Creating Telepathy (Score:2)
This is so cool! (Score:3, Interesting)
This , if true , will have HUGE implications - we'll be able to see what people THINK. I don't know if you actually grasp the monument dimensions of this. Checking for terrorism, knowing if you are really loved, truth telling machines, like the internet, something like this can level the plain field for a long long time...
Re: (Score:2)
"Checking, checking, checking... Nope! no terrorism here!"
Re: (Score:2)
Checking... Checking...Checking....
Ewwwww.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Okay nobody think of anything!"
"Your destruction has been chosen!"
"Who though of something?! I didn't!"
*Giant marshmallow blobs appear*
Re: (Score:2)
"Do not think about the white hippopotamus while turning the boiling water into gold!"
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really want George W. Bush having access to your thoughts, even if it was just visual data? I can personally think of few worse things than that.
Re:This is so cool! (Score:5, Insightful)
This , if true , will have HUGE implications - we'll be able to see what people THINK.
Data in V1/V2 does not constitute cognition, those areas constitute pretty much a visual map of data gathered by the eye (roughly). Its doubtful that imagined visuals are even represented in these areas. This, in other words, doesn't provide any insight into thoughts, just what people see.
I admit, though, that this is awesome. If we can read it, we theoretically could write to it, which would allow for direct neural interfaces.
I still wonder (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed that handwriting seems to be tied to the same channel as speech, but typing is a different channel, and over time it tends to override and damage the speech/handwriting channel.
Nice (Score:2)
Ive often thought this might be possible - get a Neural Network to analyse those MRI images we could have some interesting results.
N.
Not much to see here - just fMRI & statistics. (Score:2)
They use fMRI scans. This means they measure the blood flow which powers the neurons. It is like measuring the power usage of the various parts of the gpu and figuring out the graphics it is rendering...
Of course a real neural interface would be amazing (first of all imagine of all the pr0n - yeah, that's what I mean, you just have to IMAGINE!, rule 34!) but we are not even close. Or as journalists would very incorrectly state "we are light years from that" (hmm, unless they mean the brain scanning center
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is, if it is not used metaphorically and you actually think "light year" measures time. You are right though, the phrase I chose is not a good example of that.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I remembered one such instance I read in a paper not long ago. In one of those "scientific" articles it mentioned that photons from the sun take 8 light-minutes to reach earth... Obviously the writer thought a light-minute/year etc is time when it applies to light, or something like that. Anyway, don't tell me you haven't read stuff like that...
Re: (Score:2)
Or as journalists would very incorrectly state "we are light years from that" (hmm, unless they mean the brain scanning center in the Betelgeuse system).
Our planet/solar system/galaxy is moving through space, and at the time we discover said technology we could very well be light years away from the location we are at today.
Not impressed (Score:5, Funny)
Dr. Walter Bishop (Cambridge) was doing this in the '70s.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but these guys did it without the cow!
This was done a long time ago with cats (Score:2)
Feedback Loop? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting concept. I wonder if it might be used to refine an image, with an effect rather like watching an interlaced image downloading.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
IIIIIIIII tried tried tried ttttttttthhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaatttttt once once once once...............bbbbbbaaaaaaaaaadddddddddd iiiiiiiiiidddddddeeeeeeeeaaaaaaa.
Re: (Score:2)
If they could get the processing to work that fast then yeah. I wonder if that would fry your brain...
I vote that you try it first.
Re:Feedback Loop? (Score:4, Funny)
Would looking at the image your brain is generating at the same time you are generating it create a feedback loop much like holding a microphone too close to a speaker?
Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich?
Nope, dreams would just be noise (Score:5, Informative)
Dreams appear to be based on the 'noise' coming in, but a lot of interpretation is applied (and without imposed constraints of consistency or logic). A common game/prank [ultimatecampresource.com] involves people asking yes/no questions about an alleged dream, but the answers they get are based on some simple scheme like "yes if the last word in the question they ask ends in a consonant". Surprisingly detailed 'stories' get constructed... by the person asking the questions. (Here's what appears to be an online version [callenish.com].) Actual dreams seem to be built in an analogous way, with the subconscious 'asking questions' of the senses (which are just feeding in 'static') and weaving an experience out of them.
I'd guess that 'eavesdropping' on dreams via this means would only get the kind of swirling colors and such you 'see' when you close your eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
is it dark
NO
is the sun shining
NO
is the moon visible
YES
am i outdoors
NO
am i looking through the window
NO
can I see the moon
NO
is it cloudy
NO
am i in bed
YES
am i with a pretty girl
YES
am i dead
YES
is the girl a necrophiliac
NO
did the girl kill me
YES
How do I wake up?? I don't think I like this dream very much!!
Brought to you by (Score:2)
A division of Massive Dynamic [massivedynamic.com]. "What do we do? What don't we do."
TLJ (Score:4, Insightful)
Cant wait for my DC Mini (Score:2)
And some Paprika [wikipedia.org] to go with it.
Thought crime? (Score:2)
yeah, put a conehat on Bush and got a BSOD (Score:2)
so they claimed to read his brain.
Yet Another Unnew Result (Score:5, Informative)
The primary visual cortex (V1) has already been shown to be retinotopic. What's being seen can be mapped directly from the cortex. It's crude and low-res, but it works.
20 years ago a researcher working with Karl Pribram at Radford University was able to detect signals from small cellular assemblies of the visual cortex that represented a particular shape being viewed without mapping the entire shape from V1.
In both these, the images were received directly from the brain. In both they were digitally processed and presented. In all three what was retrieved was not an image, but was a pattern of neural electrical activity that they had already determined represented a particular visual field. They could not (in keeping with the /. tendency to represent reality with fiction) for instance, retrieve the third frame of a series of images that had been briefly presesnted. They would have had to show the image for some time that record EEG from the appropriate areas for long enough that they could get a good correlation when showing it a second time.
Some great potential here (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, I'm reminded of the interrogation device from the movie Barb Wire, the one that pulls out images from your brain whether you want it to or not...
Dream girl! Finally!! (Score:2)
FINALLY! Someone will be able to help me find that dream girl I keep dreaming of! Think she'll be able to forgive me? [nudge, nudge. wink, wink.]
Law Enforcement Sketch Drawing (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this would be amazing for law enforcement sketches. Instead of having to ask a witness what the person looked like, they could just copy it out of their visual cortex. No, it wouldn't be perfect, and it wouldn't be acceptable in court as proof someone was there (since you can just imagine your worst enemy in the place of the actual person), but it would help with sketches for wanted posters and the like. Especially if it was cheap and easy.
The Opposite (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if the process can be reversed, and images can be fed into the brain to create a dream sequence? Will people who really hate their reality use this as an escape and never try to wake up again?
Cool story!
Fringe (Score:2)
Didn't they do something like this on Fox's Fringe [fox.com] series as a plot device?
For anyone unfamiliar with the show, it's basically Fox's response to Eureka on the SciFi channel, only much, much darker and probably unlikely to last more than one season...
Brainshots? (Score:3, Funny)
I haven't read the article yet. Does it include any brainshots? (Please, no JFK jokes...)
BFD (Score:2)
is this why JFK's brain disappeared (Score:2)
I always wondered how the President of the USA could end up with his brain missing but mostly why it could be missing. I figured the Sci-Fi stories of brain scanning and the likes probably had someone worried something in JFK's memory should stay hidden unknown to all others.
now it seems that if this was the case, they just might have based their actions on a valid fear.
LoB
Pics or it didn't happen (Score:2)
nuf said
Re:Pics or it didn't happen (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe this image will not require a subscription, although I suspect it will.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/cache/MiamiImageURL/B6WSS-4V4113M-P-7/0?wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkzk [sciencedirect.com]
On the off chance it does, keep in mind this is not the full article. Critiques along the lines of "this doesn't prove anything," or "They should have done X" are premature if you haven't read the full (journal) article. If you thought of it, they probably covered that in the article you're not willing to pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
Go to a library. No paying needed. If it's a university library you can even get an electronic copy instantly and won't have to wait for the mail.
Of course, it requires going outside....
Re: (Score:2)
Lightspeed Briefs ftw
Re: (Score:2)
To his credit, that robot is less creepy than the Britneys and Spice Girls of this world. At least that robot is a honest fake.