VentureBeat

Neuroscientist Lawrence Farwell has been working for years on a way to surpass the polygraph, the conventional “lie detector” well known for its appearance in crime dramas, but banned from most courtrooms for its inaccuracy. Farwell is convinced there’s a better way and has named his company, Brain Fingerprinting Technologies, after his method.

Brain fingerprinting is a pretty simple concept. Farwell has designed equipment that measures a specific brainwave response, the P300 Mermer, for a clear positive or negative reaction from the brain to stimuli. That’s significantly different from the polygraph, which examines indirect physiological symptoms like blood pressure and pulse rate, with trained operators trying to evaluate the significance of what they’re seeing.

The stimuli, at least in criminal cross-examinations — brain fingerprinting has other uses, but more on that in a moment — consist of a sort of controlled experiment to determine what a subject knows. Say that the police want to know if a suspect used a particular axe to commit a murder. The suspect has probably never seen that axe if they didn’t commit the murder, so if their brainwaves indicate recognition when shown a picture of the axe, the police suddenly have new evidence.

But that test would be too simple, because an innocent person could have various reasons for recognizing that same axe. So first the police, who presumably know details of the crime, cross-examine the suspect to determine what they do or don’t know. If they’re a professional lumberjack, the police know to focus on all the evidence except the axe.

Afterward, when the test begins, pictures are flashed, or information is mentioned, that is irrelevant to the crime. Mixed in is information that the police told the suspect themselves, which of course get a positive reaction from the brain fingerprinting machine. And finally there are particulars to the crime that should be unknown to an innocent, whether it’s a mention of the axe, or a picture of the crime scene.

Brain fingerprinting has been used in many tests and a couple of actual cases so far, having been admitted to court in Pottawattamie County, Iowa. Farwell says it’s a highly reliable test, though not perfect. “So far we’ve always been right,” he told me. “But that’s never true in science.”

Still, it’s likely as good as other accepted methods that law enforcement use, most of which are susceptible to error — yes, even DNA testing. However, the path to widespread recognition for government use by law enforcement, counter-terrorism and the military is hard, and some time remains before brain fingerprinting can be considered “proven.”

There are other uses for the technology. Marketers, for instance, can use it to get a direct read on a person testing a product or watching an advertisement. And health professionals may be able to use brain fingerprinting to diagnose patients with conditions like Alzheimer’s, who don’t have the “Aha!” reaction to things they should recognize.

Brain Fingerprinting, the company, is currently in the final round of a competition called the Global Security Challenge, which will net it $500,000 if it wins on November 15th and, more importantly, the recognition of security professionals. Farwell also says he may soon secure government contracts that could be worth tens of millions of dollars, simply to perform extensive tests with his device — some smaller government tests have already been done.

However, he’s also looking for venture funding to build out the company, saying it will take about $25 million over time to help prove the technology. Brain Fingerprinting is located in Seattle, Washington.

Next Story: Video: Microsoft creates a boy band to hype PDC 2008
Previous Story: BlackBerry’s iPhone-envy literally shows in Vodafone promo pics

Tags: co:brain fingerprinting technologies