The Men Who Stare at Goats

MWSAG had a 'nice' (read 'new age'), albeit outdated message and 'interesting' (read 'Hollywood') depictions of government research into psychological operations and non-lethal weapons technologies, but it lacked any serious 'future' considerations of how such 'psyop' is increasingly becoming 'neurowarfare'.

The pseudoscience of Remote Viewing, MKULTRA, etc. was focused on two things: (1) 'enhancing' select special operations soldier performance, and (2) alternative means of interrogation. This was trial and error pseudoscience (read 'science motivated by subjective self-reports') with ad hoc and flawed research methodology, which, of course, resulted in large margins of error (read lack of ability to reproduce results on cue). One step further, the electronic warfare age non-lethal weapons thrust of the 90s looked at innovative ways to psychophysiologically affect targets (Long Range Acoustical Devices, Extremely Low Frequency Radiation, etc.).

The first iteration of the neuro stuff, which The Men Who Stare at Goats did not touch upon, is about process improvement (i.e. augmented cognition, neurotechnology for intelligence analysts).Logically and truly, the next iteration is for neuro to re-penetrate the subjective element, such as in neurotechnologies (drugs, diagnostics, and devices) for improving warfighter performance. That these technologies are a priority is evidenced by Opportunities in Neuroscience for Future Army Applications (NAP, 2009). I speculate that a new iteration of how neuro- will be used to help tag, track, locate, target, (TTLT) and, ultimately, 'kill' targets. The TTLT part of it is reflected in the rise of brain-based credibility assessment methodologies (i.e. brain fingerprinting). The kill aspect could be soft kill (i.e. conversion, de-motivation) or hard kill (i.e. lethal neural agents, neurodegenerative diseases).

The national security implications due to these emerging technologies are real. For instance, radicals can utilize sophisticated 'neuromarketing' methodologies to fine tune terrorist recruiting processes [process improvement]; use neuropharmaceuticals to dope up their own 'armies' [subjective enhancement]; use mind-machine interfaces to launch soft power (i.e. manipulation of media)  campaigns; and/or develop neurodegenerative agents to kill [object-oriented]. These are easily accessible technologies, which, unlike nuclear proliferation, do not require acquisition of hard to obtain materials (i.e. refined uranium), and do not require hard to find specialists (i.e. anonymous nuclear scientists). This is an area that the DIA TWD (Defense Intelligence Agency Technology Warning Division) is very interested in, as evidenced in the book Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies (NAP, 2008).

Neurotechnology for Intelligence Analysts

Today, I met with a Project Manager (Dr. Todd Hughes) and Science and Engineering Technical Adviser (Dr. Sean Deeny) from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is the main / public research branch / science and technology funding arm of the Department of Defense. We discussed the Neurotechnology for Intelligence Analysts (NIA) program, field deploy-able derivations of that program, and the Cognitive Technology Threat Warning System (CT2WS).

These programs all measure and utilize the P300 wave response in the brain, which was discussed in the previous post. The P300 wave response is an electrical signal that rises in the brain in response to recognition of 'objects of significance'. The response is uber fast - the 300 in P300 stands for 300 milliseconds. Dr. Larry Farwell is credited as the 'discoverer' of the practical applications of this response. His Brainwave Fingerprinting technology uses P300 diagnostics for criminal justice and credibility assessment applications.

The NIA program uses the P300 wave to accelerate Imagery Intelligence (IMINT) analysis. IMINT analysts pour through large amounts of photographic imagery, and scan this imagery for 'objects of significance', which can mean Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) or other. Usually, the IMINT process is slow and tedious. An analyst has to crawl through piles of data, scanning every bit more or less slowly, virtually in search of needles in a haystack. The NIA program speeds up this process, a lot. An analyst wears an EEG cap and this cap measures the P300 response while the analysts are doing their IMINT tasks. If the analyst sees an 'object of significance' then software automatically tags that IMINT bit as relevant, and it is later given further scrutiny. Using this methodology, analysts can course through 10-20 images per second . There is no conscious scanning of the information - the entire process occurs subliminally. Pretty amazing!

One derivation of this technique is its use in the field for live aerial surveillance. Basically, an analyst is hooked into an aircraft surveillance feed and uses the same subliminal procedure to scan the environment for said objects of significance. This kicks the shit out of the conventional manual 'eyeball' method and bootstraps cognitive video analysis (real-time video analysis that looks out for pixel-related changes).

Another derivation is use in conjunction with night vision, binoculars, or other visual-field enhancing devices. The unconscious mind of the warfighter can rather intuitively sense danger. CT2WS harnesses this 'intuitive' impulse (which is characterized by the P300 response) to alert warfighters when there is potential danger in the dojo. Maybe there is an IED or a sniper over there. The warfighter's (un)conscious mind(s) pick up on that danger. The warfighter's personal level of sensitivity to that very quick threat perception impulse can determine life or death. By integrating P300 neurotechnology with visual field devices, lives can be saved and battlefield intuition can be enhanced.

The major challenges for this technology is a problem of cumbersome hardware. Standard EEG systems do not work so well in 'noisy' (i.e. physical movement-heavy) environments, and they also require the application of conductive liquid (i.e. EEG gel) in order for the electrodes to pick up on the electrical signals of the brain. While companies are working on 'dry EEG' technology, as well as algorithms for processing EEG signals in noisy environments, the technology is just not there yet. This is the major obstacle from research and development to the actual field deploy-ability of such devices.

The minor challenge for this technology is user-friendliness. For instance, in the NIA program analysts get bored. Basically, they are staring at an apparently blank screen (images are being played at the rate of 10-20 per second, which more or less gives the appearance of a subtle strobe light, hardly offering any viewing pleasure). As far as the functioning of this technology depends on maintaining the attentional capabilities of the analyst, the process has to be a lot more engaging than it is now. Attempts have been made to get at this 'engagement factor' by having the analysts perform some type of 'routine' task during 'break time'.

This brings up an interesting point that the P300 response is very fast, so as to be subliminal, but its occurrence is relative to the brain functioning of the subject in question. For instance, an expert's brain fires the P300 a lot faster than a non-expert. Somebody with ADHD is not going to do very well at a P300 task. (Elsewhere, P300 response has actually been used as a measurement of ADHD). So the unconscious mind may be doing the light lifting, but it can only do such lifting so far as there is adequate 'cognitive infrastructure' in place.

Therefore, at DARPA, I posed the question: perhaps there is a signature in the brain (e.g. cross-cortical alpha-wave coherence), which denotes 'being in the zone'. Such a signature is representative of the 'cognitive infrastructure' necessary to keep the subject mind-machine interfaced (engaged in the P300 task). If you know the electrical signature that needs to be maintained, then why not engage the conscious mind of the subject in 'zone maintenance' via neurobiofeedback while his/her unconscious is going to town on the analysis of imagery intelligence.

That comment raised a couple eyebrows, so don't be surprised if you see this in the next DARPA NIA RFP at FBO.GOV! ;;)

Brainwave Fingerprinting

Yesterday, the founder and chief scientist of Brainwave Fingerprinting, Inc. - Dr. Larry Farwell -took the time to talk with me about how his product applies to national security. Back in 1994, Farwell, while still a PhD student at Harvard, was awarded a $1 million dollar contract by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to apply and further develop his brainwave fingerprinting technique. The technique is primarily used as a tool for detection of deception. Unlike standard lie detection / credibility assessment techniques, rather than monitoring emotional responses to questions, Farwell’s technique measures the brain for an electrical signal, called the ‘P300’, the appearance of which allows operators to identify whether or not the individual in questioning has a memory of specific objects in context. For instance, brainwave fingerprinting has been used to distinguish FBI Agents from non-FBI Agents, by virtue of the fact that FBI Agents have specific knowledge, granted through training and field experience – knowledge that non-agents are not accustomed to store in memory. This same methodology has been used for counterterrorism / interrogation purposes to assess whether or not a supposed assailant / terrorist possesses memory of specific elements of an attack that only the true perpetrator could recall. This ability to distinguish threat from non-threat is a great boon for military special operations working in the counterinsurgency and urban environments. With a track record of 100% accuracy, the brainwave fingerprinting technique has been ruled admissible in US courts. As a tool of justice, it has been used as evidence to convict criminals and clear the innocent. Indeed, Farwell’s business is that of a private investigator – like a real-life Cal Lightman / Paul Eckman (reference to the hit TV show ‘Lie to Me’), except that, instead of reading facial expressions and body language, he sets the record straight with the power of the observation of the brain.

Farwell is the surrogate father of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) Neurotechnology for Intelligence Analysts (NIA) program, which harnesses the brainwave fingerprinting technology to facilitate image intelligence (IMINT) analysts in detecting objects of significance amid overwhelming amounts of data. Conventional IMINT analysis requires deliberate investigation of data, wherein an analyst can spend a significant amount of time searching a sheet of data for an object of significance. NIA speeds up this process by using the ‘brainwave fingerprint’ (P300), a signal that occurs within 200-500 milliseconds of the onset of a stimulus, to quickly assess whether or not there is an object of significance in the package. With such an unconscious and rapid response, analysts can spot objects of relevance in IMINT before the thought of significance enters conscious awareness. Of course, analytical expertise is the key to the effectiveness of NIA; for only experts in IMINT analysis possess the wherewithal to detect useful signals (objects of interest) amid background noise. Interestingly, to this effect, brainwave fingerprinting can facilitate the distinction between expert and non-expert; for, presumably, the expert will recall elements of his occupation with rapidity, whereas the non-expert will not have the same working memory capacity. Farwell said that research into reverse engineering the P300 response to entrain expertise was underway, albeit handed off to other scientists. Perhaps such research is alive and well in DARPA’s Accelerated Learning program.

Of course, there is also a commercial application of the brainwave fingerprinting technology. It can be used for the purposes of determining whether or not marketing campaigns are memorable. It can tell whether this or that form of an advertisement has ‘staying power’ in the brain. I can think of pretty impressive spinoffs for this technology; including visual media, web site design, music, and movies – a sort of neuro-revolution brought to the doorstep of the entertainment industry. Independent movie makers, web site designers, campaign managers, artists, etc. how bad would you like to engineer your work to have maximum staying power in the brain? I suppose, for some, there are ethical issues associated with the use of this technology for such purposes. Perhaps this is why Farwell prefers to emphasize the applicability of his product to criminal justice and military operations. He told me he doesn’t really care about whether people consume Coke or Pepsi; he is interested in making the world a better place. God knows our world, which is at war in every quarter, could use a boost in this regard. Stay tuned to how Brainwave Fingerprinting plays out in theater. I expect it to be a mainstay.