MIT Scientists Use Radio Waves To Sense Human Emotions (cnn.com) 91
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNNMoney: Researchers at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory have developed a device that uses radio waves to detect whether someone is happy, sad, angry or excited. The breakthrough makes it easier to accomplish what scientists have tried to do for years with machines: sense human emotions. The researchers believe tracking a person's feelings is a step toward improving their overall emotional well-being. The technology isn't invasive; it works in the background without a person having to do anything, like wearing a device. The device called EQ-Radio, which was detailed in a paper published online Tuesday, resembles a shoebox, as of now. It works by bouncing wireless signals off a person. These signals are impacted by motion, such as breathing and heartbeats. When the heart pumps blood, a force is exerted onto our bodies, and the skin vibrates ever so slightly. After the radio waves are impacted by these vibrations, they return to the device. A computer then analyzes the signals to identify changes in heartbeat and breathing. The researchers demonstrated their system detects emotions on par with an electrocardiogram (EKG), a common wearable device medical professionals use to monitor the human heart. The machine's analysis of the radio waves relies on artificial intelligence, which learns how various heartbeats indicate certain emotions. As a part of the testing, the machine bounced radio waves off actors who recreated a range of emotions. The more emotions the machine experienced, the better it identified what signals, such as a fast heartbeat, gave away their true feelings. By monitoring radio waves reflected off people who are happy, the machine is exposed to certain signs -- such as heart rate or a type of breathing -- associated with being in good spirits.
Lame (Score:1)
I can do this too. It's called looking at someone.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The goal wasn't to make computers able to do something that humans can't do, but to make it do something humans can do, but which computers (so far) cannot.
Ultimately this will just be another augment to automated monitoring, for use in any place where there is benefit to knowing people's emotions but a cost associated with having a human watch them all the time.
Re:Lame (Score:4, Insightful)
Ultimately this will just be another augment to automated monitoring, for use in any place where there is benefit to knowing people's emotions but a cost associated with having a human watch them all the time.
Like the TSA security check points at airports?
The TSA already tries to do behavioral profiling. I could see them jumping all over this as the latest magic cure-all to make up for the incompetence of their screeners who miss 95% of the things they're supposed to be watching for [arstechnica.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately this will just be another augment to automated monitoring, for use in any place where there is benefit to knowing people's emotions but a cost associated with having a human watch them all the time.
Like the TSA security check points at airports?
The TSA already tries to do behavioral profiling. I could see them jumping all over this as the latest magic cure-all to make up for the incompetence of their screeners who miss 95% of the things they're supposed to be watching for [arstechnica.com].
In your eagerness to point out the ineptness of the TSA, you may have missed the part where each individual's emotional responses have to be measured before subsequent emotional responses can be identified. Of course, this means it's useless for detecting the emotions of people who haven't been previously baselined, e.g., random people in a TSA screening line.
Re: (Score:2)
In your eagerness to dismiss my comment, you may have missed the part where the TSA is already engaged in behavioral profiling [theintercept.com] despite not having any previous baselines to compare people's behavior to. Of course this means it's useless for detecting the emotions of random people in a TSA screening line, but that hasn't stopped the TSA from putting it in place.
Re: (Score:2)
In your eagerness to dismiss my comment, you may have missed the part where the TSA is already engaged in behavioral profiling [theintercept.com] despite not having any previous baselines to compare people's behavior to. Of course this means it's useless for detecting the emotions of random people in a TSA screening line, but that hasn't stopped the TSA from putting it in place.
Profiling based upon observable behaviors is not remotely similar to detecting emotions base upon RF detection. One requires calibration of an individual's "signature"; the other does not. This is not to claim that the TSA's method of behavioral screening is effective compare to, say, the methods used by El Al airline screeners; in fact, the TSA's general approach to providing security theatre as opposed to genuine security pretty much predicts that it won't be effective at all.
Re: (Score:1)
Your eyes work in the radio spectrum? Interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
We have to pay the wireless router way less in order to get quality results.
Tinfoil hats! (Score:5, Funny)
Tin Foil Conspiracy! (Score:2)
We all know that is good for nothing, in stopping them from controlling your brain from afar!
(MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE USED MORE ALL CAPS WORDS? I don't know, I can't find my tinfoil hat.)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with tinfoil is it grows all spiky really quickly. You brush it off and all those spikes go everywhere, killing everything electronic you touch, and making it hard to plug stuff in and out without getting shocked.
Al foils, though, doesn't have that problem. Hell, even tin cans are steel these days.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that if there was any use for something like this, it would be as a replacement for the polygraph. It would probably be equally worthless in that it isn't accurate enough to conclusively determine whether or not one is lying, while also possibly being harder to fool in that the existing techniques for fooling polygraphs may not work.
Either way though, I suspect that the asshole administering the polygraph (and yes, they're pretty much all assholes, even former polygraphers usually agree) won't let y
Re: (Score:2)
A piece of fucking string is a replacement for the polygraph. If J. Edgar Hoover didn't take kickbacks we'd never have heard of that scam.
This thing on the other hand seems to be able to detect if people are reacting to something.
Re: (Score:2)
Polygraph, just clench your butt checks, this raises your blood pressure and breathing enough to cook results (if you are bored and don't care about the test, do the butt check rumba, switching cheeks, in a musical beat, remember not to over clinch as you will bounce around on the seat, ;D). Of course you could just be born a psychopath and the charade of polygraph (the measure of reactions to questions, based upon the ability of the actor carrying out the test convincing you the test works, regardless of
Greetings, citizen! (Score:3, Insightful)
Greetings, citizen! Your personal stress level appears to be elevated. To ensure a more harmonious life experience and enhance your calm, please report to the nearest behavioral modification center. Thank you for your cooperation, and have a joy-joy day.
Re: (Score:2)
Greetings, citizen! Your personal stress level appears to be elevated. To ensure a more harmonious life experience and enhance your calm, please report to the nearest behavioral modification center. Thank you for your cooperation, and have a joy-joy day.
Prior art. Some movie I saw. :)
WTF? (Score:2, Interesting)
actors who recreated a range of emotions
their true feelings
Hmm...am I missing something?
Re: (Score:1)
Hmmmm . . .
I'm sure there were real emotions the machine could detect,
-OR WERE THERE!
You're observation brings up an interesting point - what if this machine that can "detect emotions" ends up being another piece of pseudo-science that we follow blindly, like the lie detector?
Also, if this can detect real emotion but also reacts to acting, could you lie to the machine to get it to not know how you're actually feeling?
Re:WTF? (Score:4, Informative)
I think TFS is a bit sloppy, as is the first link. According to the MIT link, the subjects were not actors, just subjects. From that article:
For the experiments, subjects used videos or music to recall a series of memories that each evoked one the four emotions, as well as a no-emotion baseline. Trained just on those five sets of two-minute videos, EQ-Radio could then accurately classify the person’s behavior among the four emotions 87 percent of the time.
AI (Score:2)
Christ, another "AI" breakthough. We call algorithms AI now. Apparently a bunch of "if/else" statements are AI now.
Re: (Score:2)
All programming is if/else when you get down to it.
Re:AI (Score:5, Informative)
That's only 1 / 3 of programming.
i.e.
1. Linear = Unconditional Sequence of instructions
2. Cyclic = Unconditional Iteration / Repetition
3. Choice = Conditional Branching
Re: (Score:2)
A flat sequence of instructions are an if/then at a lower level. If there's shit on the stack, if there's a pointer to return to, if there's input to process, etc.
Loops are simply if/then. Unconditional loops are just "if true, then". Loops are often unrolled by a compiler for performance.
And considering we use binary, it's all a bunch of if statements at the lowest level.
Re: (Score:3)
1. It is not really an if-then if the conditional is always hard-coded to true.
2. A _sequence_ is fundamental different from a _conditional_.
* If-then deals with a _single_ sequence point.
* A sequence deals with _multiple_ sequence points.
i.e. If you have _2_ if-then conditionals, A and B, then what is the _order_ they are processed?
* Both at the same time?
* A before B
* B before A
* Neither ?
I understand the abstraction you're trying to get at but you're trying to kludge a model and force it be analogous whe
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same depressing way that nanotech became toothpaste and sunscreen instead of the little machines Drexler wrote about.
Think about it as you stand on a Hoverboard or do a little bit of Android programming.
Or you can do this by looking for the interjection (Score:2)
Been doing this for years (Score:5, Funny)
Ever since I can remember, I had the ability to sense electromagnetic emissions from other people to detect their emotional state. I also had an ability I call "aural telepathy" -- the ability to sense a person's thoughts by tuning in to subtle sensations such as tiny vibrations in the air.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Micro Body Language (Score:1, Interesting)
Ever since I can remember, I had the ability to sense electromagnetic emissions from other people to detect their emotional state. I also had an ability I call "aural telepathy" -- the ability to sense a person's thoughts by tuning in to subtle sensations such as tiny vibrations in the air.
If you are serious then you might want to consider the possibility that you were born with hyper-acuity (sensitivity) to micro body language. People born with this amped up body language awareness at a conscious level can in a sense almost read peoples minds to some degree. Not through psychic like means but just through an autistic-like ability to pattern-match people's micro-body language at a level a speed and accuracy beyond what people normally perceive, or normally only perceive at a subconscious leve
Re: (Score:2)
You win the Whooshed Of The Month award for that one.
Re: (Score:2)
I can also, with a consistently high success rate, predict how people I'm around will react to most things
It's called confirmation bias.
Re: (Score:1)
The researchers demonstrated their system detects emotions on par with an electrocardiogram (EKG)
Which is to say, not very well.
In fact, it doesn't detect EMOTIONS at all - it detects body state, through heart rate, breathing and MAYBE other measures.
These can be CORRELATED with emotions, based on self-reporting, but there's no sensing of any EMOTION at all.
BS.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever since I can remember, I had the ability to sense electromagnetic emissions from other people to detect their emotional state. I also had an ability I call "aural telepathy" -- the ability to sense a person's thoughts by tuning in to subtle sensations such as tiny vibrations in the air.
Spiders are teaming up as we speak to attack the USPTO over prior art. Just waiting.. Biding their time until...
Not quite what is being claimed. (Score:1)
The machine can tell if someone is acting happy, sad, angry or excited.
Not quite the same as detecting if someone is really experiencing these emotions.
Creepy. (Score:1)
I bet it stops working if I wear a tinfoil suit.
Whaddya expect? (Score:2)
Meh! (Score:1)
Still can't detect sarcasm /Sarcasm
It's not April 1st yet (Score:1)
Re: It's not April 1st yet (Score:1)
Seriously. Apples paper bag and MS curing cancer aren't helping me feel like it is September.
MIT Scientists Use Radio Waves To Sense Human Emot (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This sounds more like the Star Trek Medical Bed.
Yay!
Hey. It learned. When you copped an attitude, it would respond with guilt tripping to the fast healing of your body being impeded. Or wait, was that the hologram doc? I can't keep the two separated in my head.
We call it Voight-Kampff (Score:4, Insightful)
I've seen another technology that can track eyes to measure dilation of pupils, heart rate from changes in skin color on the face, as well as breathing. A bit more to estimate body temperature from the infrared. I wonder if it is possible to measure blood pressure, not just that blood pressure falls and rises but something like those inflatable cuffs, without touching the person.
Measuring emotional response from questioning certainly has benefits for a police interrogator, especially if that detective's job is to find out if the suspect is human. I can see this as useful to quickly and easily measure a person's health. Problems with breathing while asleep would be easier with this machine. Put it at the entrance to a hospital and set certain limits on where it might flag someone for more attention. Not to replace more traditional diagnostic tools but to augment it.
If this could allow for removing some of the wires and such from a patient in a hospital and make them more comfortable. The emotional state stuff was already there before, they just automated it a bit more. Only then it was called a polygraph.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, but this one works around the "Don't...TOUCH" crowd of lawsuit-happy.. Wait, who are these supposed to be used on? /humor
Low tech drivel (Score:1)
They already have radar that remotely scans the nerves and brain- reading and altering the emotions, and other functions inside of us. Its been around for decades. Its patented and classified. drrobertduncan.com [drrobertduncan.com]
Vital signs and remote diagnosis also work with it no need for this type of crazy polygraph level garbage that provides no useful Intel.
Wireless Polygraph (Score:1)
So what you're saying here is that MIT have invented a wireless polygraph [wikipedia.org]. Maybe we should build a bunch of portable ones and give them out to reporters.
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying here is that MIT have invented a wireless polygraph [wikipedia.org]. Maybe we should build a bunch of portable ones and give them out to reporters.
Not a bad idea. I think it's a good idea to invent sub-dermal nano'tuders to help people cheat. There's $ome profit! Drooling....
Like lie detectors, doesn't work with psychopaths (Score:3)
Devices that rely on heartbeat, breathing rhythm, sweat etc. only detect (some) emotional states with normal people, but not with psychopaths.
Re: (Score:3)
Devices that rely on heartbeat, breathing rhythm, sweat etc. only detect (some) emotional states with normal people, but not with psychopaths.
Or it turns out from the summary even actors can fool it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, good point, and related. Psychopaths are the most "talented" actors, as they can switch empathy on and off, as required.
Re: (Score:3)
Psychopaths are the most "talented" actors, as they can switch empathy on and off, as required.
This is incorrect. Persons with Antisocial Personality Disorder (aka psychopaths aka sociopaths) have a diminished capacity for empathy or in the most extreme cases, no capacity for empathy at all. This is not something they can control, so cannot "switch empathy on and off". The reason for this is not fully understood but if it's like schizoaffective disorders, it may be treatable.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not something they can control, so cannot "switch empathy on and off".
It's not the empathy, but the illusion of empathy that they turn on and off.
And they can do it so well that even trained professionals (e.g. psychiatrists) are routinely fooled.
Re: (Score:2)
Devices that rely on heartbeat, breathing rhythm, sweat etc. only detect (some) emotional states with normal people, but not with psychopaths.
I have a subject they can test it on. If he is beaten by it, it's a world revolution product. Well, until lawsuits start flying about the unhealthy RF noise being emitted by this truth reader bot making you all cancerous and jazz.......... as said plaintiffs sit under a fluorescent light band in the court room without complaining.
"It relies on AI"... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So therefore it cannot work, because there is no such thing as AI.
Well, it probably uses artificial artificial intelligence. They just call it artificial intelligence because it sounds like it's really artificial, when it's actually artificially artificial.
Typical marketing BS.
Re: "It relies on AI"... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Just another way to surveil and track people (Score:2)