NEUROSCIENCE: Tapping
the MindIngrid Wickelgren
Although still largely experimental, devices that decipher brain
signals are advancing quickly and allowing some fully paralyzed
people to interact with the worldAmyotrophic lateral
sclerosis (ALS) can trap the mind inside an immobile body. It
destroys the nerves that control muscles, eventually leaving
patients without the ability to speak or even flick their eyes to
one side. In the past few years, however, researchers have started
to equip a few such "locked-in" patients, including those paralyzed
by stroke or other diseases, with communication devices that unlock
their minds.
For decades, science-fiction writers have envisioned computers
that communicate directly with the brain. Now a rapidly expanding
clique of researchers is making it a reality. A few laboratories
started developing these so-called brain-computer interfaces (BCIs)
in the 1980s and have been refining them since then
(Science, 29 October 1999, p. 888).
Now several dozen teams have entered the field. Together they're
improving upon early BCI models and coming up with new ways to read
brain signals. According to BCI pioneer Jonathan Wolpaw of the
Wadsworth Center, part of the New York State Department of Health in
Albany, "it's a very exciting time; a lot of people are getting
involved."
Most BCIs read brain waves, the electrical impulses created by
neural activity that can be detected--albeit fuzzily--through the
scalp. By diligently controlling their mental activity, patients can
choose letters to spell words, guide a cursor, or direct crude
robots. But a rival circle of scientists is rapidly advancing a type
of BCI that is implanted inside the brain. Such devices tap into the
more detailed neural signals relayed by individual neurons. The most
sophisticated of these implanted BCIs have recently enabled monkeys
to play video games and even manipulate robotic arms. Whether the
implanted devices will actually lead to more versatile and workable
BCIs than the external type is a matter of fierce debate.
In the past few years, brain-wave BCI technologies have been
advancing rapidly, providing faster spelling, better cursor control,
and headway into prosthetics, environmental-control devices, and
smart wheelchairs. The advances are fueled in part by cheaper and
more sophisticated computer hardware and software, which has given
BCI researchers access to portable machines that perform complex
mathematical manipulations on the fly. Good old-fashioned funding
helps, too: The National Institutes of Health awarded $3.3 million
in late 2002 to a partnership headed by the Wadsworth group to
further develop software that can test several BCI systems to see
which is best for a patient. Researchers can also use the software
to build and test their own brain-tapping technologies.
In addition, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) recently awarded a Duke University research team $26 million
to improve its implanted BCI technique. A DARPA spokesperson says
the agency is interested in technology that might, for example,
enable soldiers to push buttons with their brains, giving them
speedier control of submarines and aircraft and enabling them to
more adeptly manipulate robotic arms that move munitions.
So far, very few patients have had access to a BCI. A few
scattered labs have conducted tests on one or more severely disabled
patients, and one research team has tried its BCI technology on a
record 11 patients so far. Most of the experimental subjects tested
during the development of various BCIs have been healthy
individuals. However, advancing technology and software innovations
have put BCIs on the cusp of becoming more widely available.
I think I can.
With training, people can modulate their brain waves to direct a
miniature robot to navigate its way through the rooms of a model
house.
CREDIT: J. DEL R. MILLÁN/DALLE MOLLE INSTITUTE FOR
PERCEPTUAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Developing an array of useful applications, in particular, is
critical to bringing BCIs past the experimental stage and into
regular use in people's homes--the field's next big challenge. "A
lot of good work has been done in the past 15 years to build a
foundation" for BCIs, says computer scientist Melody Moore of
Georgia State University in Atlanta. "Now, it's time to build the
house."
Tens of thousands stand to benefit from BCI technologies. Initial
beneficiaries will be people who are almost totally paralyzed: some
ALS patients, who number 30,000 in the United States alone; people
with severe forms of cerebral palsy; and patients who have suffered
severe strokes or accidents, among others. As BCI technology
improves, it is expected to become useful to people who are less
severely disabled, such as quadriplegics who want to operate a
wheelchair or a robot.
Surfing brain waves In
the brain, billions of neurons are continuously sucking in and
spewing out ions, creating tiny electrical currents. A detector
called an electroencephalogram (EEG) can measure the sum of these
subtle sparks, millions at a time, by means of electrodes affixed to
the scalp.
Niels Birbaumer, a psychologist at the University of Tübingen in
Germany, was one of the first to find that people can control
certain brain waves. He focused on so-called slow wave cortical
potentials: gradual voltage changes that emanate from the brain's
exterior section, known as the cerebral cortex, and occur over
seconds. In the early 1990s, Birbaumer and his team created a
speller that patients learn to control using positive or negative
slow waves to choose between two banks of letters. Once selected, a
bank splits in two, continuing a process of elimination to reveal
the wished-for letter. In March 1999, Birbaumer and his colleagues
reported that after 2 months of training for about an hour
a day, two ALS patients on respirators learned to write messages at
a rate of about two characters per minute.
Wolpaw trained his eye on another set of brain currents, EEG
rhythms with frequencies between 8 and 12 hertz known as mu waves,
and beta rhythms, which have about double the frequency of mu
rhythms. Both emanate from the part of the brain's surface that
mediates sensation and movement, the sensorimotor cortex. Wolpaw and
his colleagues, including Wadsworth psychologist Dennis McFarland
and program coordinator Theresa Vaughan, developed a system that
enables a person to move a cursor up or down by raising or lowering
the amplitude of a mu or beta rhythm. Usually a person first learns
to do this by imagining moving a hand or other body part up or down.
Healthy subjects, the team reported in 1994, could use mu and beta
rhythms to direct a cursor--somewhat crudely, but with up to 70%
accuracy--in two dimensions to one of four large targets at the
corners of a computer screen.
Since then, the Wadsworth team has improved its techniques for
homing in on the desired EEG frequencies, translating those signals
into cursor movements, and tuning the BCI to individual users. These
advances have given users much more precise control of the cursor.
In work now in press, McFarland, Wolpaw, and their colleagues show
that college students can use the BCI to nudge a cursor a precise
distance up or down to land on one of four icons, a step toward the
goal of a brain-wave mouse. "Once you can control a mouse, the whole
world of software opens up to you," Wolpaw says. Wadsworth
neuroscientist Irina Goncharova is now leading an effort to test
this BCI on patients with mild or moderate ALS at Drexel University
Hospital in Philadelphia.
But both Wolpaw's and Birbaumer's techniques require weeks to
months of training to teach a person how to control their brain
waves. In contrast, a BCI control technique developed by
psychologist Emanuel Donchin, now at the University of South Florida
in Tampa, requires almost no training. Donchin and his graduate
student Larry Farwell, then at the University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign, in the mid-1980s based their prototype BCI on the
so-called P300 wave, a brief voltage increase that peaks about 300
milliseconds after the onset of certain surprising or unexpected
events.
Donchin and Farwell devised a grid containing the letters of the
alphabet and typing functions such as space and backspace, which
appear in rows and columns that flash randomly on the screen. A
person focuses on a letter in the grid and mentally indicates
"that's it!" whenever the row or column containing the letter is
illuminated. This happens about 1 out of 6 flashes, making the event
somewhat surprising and therefore likely to elicit a P300 wave. The
computer then identifies the letter by finding the intersection of
the row and column that produced the wave.
Recent tests on college students indicate that the system could
be used to "type" nearly eight characters per minute with 80%
accuracy. Donchin and his team are now starting to test their BCI
with severely disabled patients.
Another BCI gives users split-second control over a mobile robot.
Instead of analyzing a particular EEG component, such as mu rhythms
or slow waves, José del R. Millán at the Dalle Molle Institute for
Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Martigny, Switzerland,
developed a BCI that analyzes overall EEG signals at eight scalp
locations. It relies on the fact that thinking vastly different
thoughts will produce different EEG patterns. Using a neural network
algorithm, a computer learns to distinguish among three such
thoughts--say, mental arithmetic, visualizing a spinning cube, or
imagining arm movements--and is programmed to perform a specific
command based on the mental pattern it detects.
In unpublished work, two healthy individuals this past spring
learned to use Millán's BCI to manipulate a pocket-sized wheeled
robot, a stand-in for a smart wheelchair. They could make it scoot
forward, turn right, turn left, or stop, and thus were able to
direct it through a model house with surprising speed. "The striking
finding is that subjects can do this with brain control in only 35%
more time than it would take if they were simply pressing a key,"
Millán says. Millán programmed his BCI to issue commands twice a
second, so users can make decisions about where to go on the fly
and, say, avoid overshooting an entryway.
Computer
communication One big drawback of these
technologies is that they are incompatible, making them difficult to
combine and slowing their development. Most of the systems started
out so inflexible that adding a new feature was agonizingly
difficult. For instance, Wolpaw and his team, including software
engineer Gerwin Schalk, found an EEG signal that appeared when a
person made a mistake while using their BCI, a discovery that could
be used to design a quick "erase" option for their system. But
adding such an option would have meant extensive reprogramming.
So in February 2000, Wolpaw, Schalk, and McFarland teamed up with
Birbaumer and Tübingen software engineer Thilo Hinterberger to build
BCI2000, a flexible, universal BCI platform on which various brain
waves could be selected and new applications could be easily built.
They share it widely, making it easier for newcomers to enter the
field. Ultimately, they hope that nurses or family caregivers will
use the Windows-based system with minimal training, eliminating the
need for scarce experts to accompany BCI software. "We need a
worldwide user-friendly system that a reasonably intelligent person
can download from the Internet for free," Birbaumer says.
Brain
dictionary. New brain-computer interfaces are helping
patients translate thoughts to words more efficiently than earlier
models did.
CREDIT: H. SHEIKH/WADSWORTH CENTER/NEW YORK STATE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
The basic framework for BCI2000 is now complete, and Wolpaw
expects details to be published soon. It has four easily adaptable
modules that handle the four essential functions of a BCI. One takes
the raw brain signal, amplifies it, and encodes it digitally.
Another extracts the desired features of the brain signal, such as a
mu rhythm or P300 signal, and translates that signal into a command,
such as movement of a cursor in a certain direction. The third
controls a device, say, one that navigates the Internet or operates
a prosthetic arm. And the fourth allows a user to start and stop the
BCI and to specify details, such as the speed, of its operation.
The software has already had an impact on the field. In spring
2002, South Florida's Donchin needed to upgrade his BCI, which was
incompatible with state-of-the-art PCs, so he could start testing
disabled patients. Donchin met with Wolpaw and Schalk at a BCI
conference in Rensselaerville, New York, in June 2002 and described
his predicament. Schalk volunteered to do the necessary programming
on BCI2000. Within 2 weeks, Schalk managed to get Donchin's BCI up
and running, enabling Donchin to bring it to New York City to test
it on his first patient (this author's father) in September.
Georgia State's Moore and her colleagues are using BCI2000 to
develop an environmental-control system that allows a user to turn
on and off lights, a television set, and a radio with brain waves.
They've also built a communication system in which a person can
select words from a list of nouns, verbs, and objects, and that will
predict words and even conversations, potentially providing faster
communication than traditional spellers allow. Their Web browser
causes a cursor to hop from one Web link to the next in response to
altered brain signals.
So far these prototype applications have been largely tested on
simulated brain signals, but Moore has just started testing them on
healthy volunteers and will soon include patients with spinal cord
injuries or early-stage ALS. Eventually, Moore plans to run all of
these applications on a laptop mounted to a smart wheelchair under
development that will also be controlled by brain waves.
Direct line from the
brain Many researchers believe that BCIs that
rely on fuzzy brain-wave signals are of limited value. These devices
listen in on the accumulated hums of millions of neurons after they
merge and pass through the skull, akin to listening to a crowd in a
baseball stadium from the parking lot. EEG-based BCIs "do not
extract the actual information in our brains--for example, our
concept of a word," says neuroscientist John Chapin of the State
University of New York Health Sciences Center in Brooklyn.
In contrast, a relatively new generation of BCI researchers
implants electrodes inside the brain to pick up the chatter of
single neurons, something like eavesdropping on the conversation of
a couple inside the stadium from a few seats away. These signals,
Chapin and others contend, comprise the actual brain code for
movement and thought.
Neurologist Philip Kennedy, head of Atlanta-based Neural Signals,
and his neurosurgeon colleagues Ron Bakay and Princewill Ehirim are
so far the only team to create a BCI with electrodes implanted in a
human. Their most successful patient, a Georgia dry-wall contractor
named Johnny Ray who had suffered a massive stroke that left him
almost totally paralyzed, learned to tune his neural signals to
operate a cursor, enabling him to spell and hit icons for statements
such as "I'm hungry." (Ray, whom Kennedy calls the first human
cyborg, used the BCI for 4 years before his death in spring 2002.)
Ray communicated through a novel electrode technology Kennedy
invented: In the brain, chemicals lining a glass cone coax neurons
to grow through the electrode and link to recording wires. This
anchors the electrode and allows stable recording. In the current
design, Kennedy and his colleagues implant two electrodes into their
patients' brains; they are working toward implanting eight at a
time. Other research teams are testing devices that extract
information from dozens to hundreds of brain cells at a time. More
massive arrays, some researchers believe, are the key to advanced
prosthetics.
In the mid-1990s, Chapin, then at the Medical College of
Pennsylvania-Hanemann School of Medicine in Philadelphia, and Miguel
Nicolelis, at Duke, threaded 46 hair-thin wires inside a rat's brain
and taught the animal to use its thoughts alone to tip a lever and
receive a drop of water. A computer depressed the lever whenever the
nerve signals picked up by the microwires displayed a pattern like
that present when the rat moved the lever with its paw.
In spring 2000, Nicolelis, Chapin, and their colleagues implanted
a more extensive array inside the brains of two owl monkeys. They
taught the monkeys to operate a joystick with their hands,
maneuvering a cursor, or to reach out with their arms to grab a
piece of fruit and bring it to their mouths. A simple formula, the
team discovered, could predict from the electrical activity of 100
neurons a monkey's hand position milliseconds later. They translated
these natural neuronal patterns into instructions for a robot
arm--and watched the robot obediently mimic the monkey's arm
movements.
Such systems have limitations. The monkey has to move its arm to
produce the correct brain signal pattern, which won't work for
paralyzed people. In addition, the monkey has no idea that its brain
signals are controlling a machine, and so it cannot learn to improve
its robotic performance.
Direct
connection. Monkeys have learned to control robotic arms
such as this one via electrodes implanted in their brains.
CREDIT: M. NICOLELIS/DUKE UNIVERSITY
Recently, a group led by neuroscientist Andrew Schwartz, formerly
at Arizona State University, addressed these issues. They tied
monkeys' hands down and had them play a game in which their brain
signals directly controlled a cursor. After 2 to 3 weeks of
practice, one of the monkeys could hit the correct target nearly
every time. The researchers linked observable changes in the firing
patterns of 64 neurons to the animal's improved skills, indicating
that practicing the brain-wave game was honing the responses of the
cells (Science, 7 June 2002, p. 1829).
"A monkey can squeeze a lot of information from a minimal neuronal
signal," Schwartz says. He emphasizes that learning, guided by the
game's visual feedback, was key to this ability.
Similarly, in work presented at the 2002 Society for Neuroscience
meeting in November, Nicolelis's team, while collecting data from 86
motor cortex neurons, taught a macaque monkey to use a joystick to
quickly position a cursor inside a target. The scientists then
disconnected the joystick--although the monkey could still handle
it--and ran the game off decoded neural signals. The monkey appeared
to learn to manipulate the cursor just by thinking and eventually
stopped moving its hands altogether.
Recently, the Duke researchers have added a new robot with a
gripper hand into the loop. When the monkey moves the cursor toward
the on-screen target, the robot will reach for an object. The monkey
will also receive tactile feedback--from small vibrators attached to
its skin--to indicate the force with which the gripper grasps the
object. The faster the vibrations, the higher the force. The
researchers hope that this will enable a monkey to learn to pick up
an object without crushing or dropping it. This experiment, says
Nicolelis, should have "a tremendous impact on what you do to
control prosthetic devices." Using tactile feedback would be
particularly useful in ALS patients, who retain some sensation even
after most motor neurons are destroyed.
In a similar effort, Schwartz, now at the University of
Pittsburgh, and his collaborators have hooked a monkey's brain up to
a robotic arm. If the monkey is allowed to view the robot and the
food on the computer screen, it can get the robot to reach out and
retrieve the food.
In both Schwartz's and Nicolelis's experiments, the monkeys were
first trained by practicing the movement with their hands, something
paralyzed people cannot do. But Nicolelis is optimistic that this
hurdle can be overcome, because people can be trained with verbal
instructions. "We hope that we can show a visual trajectory to a
human or tell him just to think about executing a movement," and
that thought alone will elicit coherent patterns of neuronal
activity in the motor cortex, Nicolelis says.
Many other hurdles must be overcome before implanting such arrays
in humans--not least of them establishing that implanted electrodes
are safe. As for stability, the microwires in the macaques were
still picking up signals from the vast majority of the initial crop
of neurons 1 year later. In Schwartz's case, some of the electrodes
have lasted up to 3 years. "But we need to know that's the rule,"
Schwartz says.
Meanwhile, Schwartz and a University of Michigan team are
developing electrodes designed to be easier to implant and to
interact more securely and safely with natural brain tissue. Brown
University's John Donoghue is also working with researchers at
Cyberkinetics of Providence, Rhode Island, on a novel silicon array
of 100 microelectrodes that he says will make extracting neural
signals much easier.
But some researchers in the field wonder if trying to implant
such arrays in the human brain to get motor instructions might be
overkill. When operating a prosthetic limb, for instance, the user
could just tell it to lift, lower, or open or close its hand--or
even grasp an object at a certain location--and let robotics do the
rest. "BCIs just need to convey intent," Wolpaw contends, and not
the details of how a brain would coordinate movements. Indeed,
neuroscientist Gert Pfurtscheller and his team at the Graz
University of Technology in Austria have already demonstrated that a
quadriplegic patient fitted with a prosthetic left hand learned to
use mental imagery along with a scalp-based BCI to open and close
the hand. After 5 months of training, the patient picked up an apple
with his new hand and ate it.
Donoghue and others respond that only implanted BCIs will give
disabled users the kind of natural movement and interaction with the
environment that they crave. In the end, the patients will say who
is correct.
Volume 299, Number 5606, Issue of 24 Jan 2003,
pp. 496-499. Copyright © 2003 by The American Association for the
Advancement of Science. All rights reserved.
|