community, myself included, dream
about this possibility every day.”
Such seamless interactions might
not be achieved for many years to come,
but Schalk says it is realistic to see im-
pressive demonstrations of functional
restoration, such as full control of robot-
ic arms with actuation of individual fin-
gers, in the near term. Despite the chal-
lenges, the potential benefits to ongoing
work in this area remain clear. “Using
conventional methods, our brain’s nor-
mal input and output pathways limit the
amount of information that can be com-
municated to about 50 bits per second,
such as for spoken speech,” says Schalk.
“Using BCI technology, it may be possi-
ble to substantially increase this rate of
communication, and thus allow for an
ideal symbiosis of the human brain and
artificial machines.”
Taylor also offers a similar per-
spective on the future of BCI technol-
ogy, suggesting that more adaptive
systems will be emerging in the near
term. “When you have a less-than-
perfect means of controlling your
computer, it is imperative that your
computer interface make the most
of the limited information coming in
from the user,” she says. In this sense,
necessity may lead to significant in-
terface improvements designed to be
more intelligent and dynamic in re-
sponding to human input.

The prospect of more intuitive input mechanisms has been a key

the biggest
challenge in
the Bci community,
says Gerwin schalk,
is the lack of
a noninvasive
sensor that can
robustly measure
brain signals
at high fidelity.

motivation for interface designers,
who have long expressed excitement
about the potential for BCI research to
change the way humans interact with
computers. Still, most BCI scientists
are careful to offer only guarded opti-
mism, cautioning that the field is still
relatively young in its methods and
results, making it unlikely the average
person will be using BCIs to interact
with computers in the near term. At
this point, noninvasive ways of record-
ing brain activity provide only low-
fidelity data. But for somebody who is
paralyzed, even gaining a slow method
of interacting with a computer can
make a significant improvement in
quality of life.

Further Reading

Berger, T. W., Chapi, J.K., Gerhardt, G.A., McFarland, D.J., Principe, J.C., Soussou, W.V., Taylor, D.M., and Tresco, P.A. Brain-Computer Interfaces: An International Assessment of Research and Development Trends. Springer, new York, n Y, 2008.

Schalk, G. Brain-computer symbiosis, Journal of Neural Engineering 5, 1, March 2008.

Schalk, G. and Mellinger, J. A Practical Guide to Brain Computer Interfacing with BCI2000. Springer-Verlag, London, U.K., 2010.

Taylor, D.M., Helms Tillery, S.I., and Schwartz, A.B. Direct cortical control of 3D neuroprosthetic devices, Science 296, 5574, June 2002.

Wolpaw, J.R., Birbaumer, N., McFarland, D.J., Pfurtscheller, G., and Vaughan T.M. Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control, Clinical Neurophysiology 113, 6, June 2002.

based in los angeles, Kirk L. Kroeker is a freelance editor and writer specializing in science and technology.

© 2011 acM 0001-0782/11/10 $10.00

Technology

Skin-like Electronic Patch Unveiled

In an emerging field called epidermal electronics, a multidisciplinary team of University of Illinois researchers has crafted a skin-like, wearable electronic patch that could transform such diverse fields as medical monitoring, wound treatment, covert communication, and human-computer interfaces.

The researchers demonstrated
a system that integrates tiny
sensors, transistors, radio-
frequency inductors, capacitors,
and other electronic devices into
an ultra-thin, flexible artificial
substrate with physical and
chemical properties that make
the patch barely distinguishable
from the user’s own skin. The
work was first reported in the Aug.
12 issue of Science.