this i a presenttion on brain fingerprinting. hope it would be useful

1. *BAAJI K; 1PARVATHY A
*ASST PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF BT AND BCE; SCTCE
1DEPARTMENT OF BT AND BCE, SCTCE TVM
11-Aug-17 1

2. CONTENTS
11-Aug-17 2
HISTORY
TECHNIQUE
CASE STUDY
APPLICATION
ADVANTAGES
LIMITATIONS
CONCLUSION

3. Introduction
Brain Fingerprinting is an investigative technique.
Recognition of familiar stimuli by measuring electrical
brain wave.
Responses towards, phrases, or pictures that are
presented on a computer screen.
11-Aug-17 3

4. The need..
11-Aug-17 4

5. History
Brain fingerprinting was invented
by Dr. Lawrence Farwell, The
chief scientist and president of
Human Brain Research
Laboratory, USA
He had tested brain
Fingerprinting technology in over
170 cases.
The test has not made a single
error in all these cases.
11-Aug-17 5

6. P300
11-Aug-17 6
Dr. Farwell discovered that the P300 was one
aspect of a larger brain-wave response that he
named MERMER® (memory and encoding
related multifaceted electroencephalographic
response).
The MERMER comprises a P300response,
occurring 300 to 800 ms after the stimulus, and
additional patterns occurring more than 800 ms
after the stimulus, providing even more
accurate results.

7. Mermer Methodology
11-Aug-17 7
Brain Fingerprinting measures electrical brain activity in
response to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a
computer screen.
It reveals a brain MERMER (memory and encoding related
multifaceted electroencephalographic response) when, and
only when, the evidence stored in the brain matches the
evidence from the crime scene
Thus, the guilty can be identified

8. TECHNIQUE
•The person to be tested wears a
special headband with electronic
sensors
•The testee is presented with a
series of relevant and irrelevant
stimuli.
•Analysis of the relevant and
irrelevant stimuli.
11-Aug-17 8

9. Picture/word
shown to an
individual
(Stimulus)
Triggers neurons
of brain
Generates
brainwave
(P300)
Electrical
Potentials
Accumulate in
brain
(MERMER)
Headgear fitted
with
Electrodes placed
on scalp
P300 –MERMER
(an scalp ERP
EEG)
Measures
brainwaves
Generates analog
signals
EEG
amplifier
Study
the data
Using a
computer
program
Found Guilty/
Not guilty
11-Aug-17 9

10. 11-Aug-17 10
measurement of electrical activity
produced by the brain as recorded
from electrodes placed on the scalp
So-called scalp EEG is collected from
tens to hundreds of electrodes
positioned on different locations at
the surface of the head
EEG signals (in the range of mille-
volts) are amplified and digitalized for
later processing.
EEG

11. The FANTASTIC four
11-Aug-17 11

12. Working Principle
A Suspect is tested by looking at three kinds of information represented
by Different coloured lines:
-----Red: information the suspect is expected to know
-----Green: information not known to suspect
-----Blue: information of the crime that only perpetrator would know
11-Aug-17 12

13. 11-Aug-17 13
NOT GUILTY: Because the blue and
green lines closely correlate, suspect
does not critical knowledge of the
crime
GUILTY: Because the blue and red
lines closely correlate, and suspect
does have critical knowledge of the
crime.

14. Results of the Brain Fingerprinting
test on Terry Harrington
For the test on Schweer's murder,
the determination of Brain
Fingerprinting was "information
absent," with a statistical
confidence of 99.9%.
The information stored in
Harrington's brain did not match
the scenario in which Harrington
went to the crime scene and
committed the murder
11-Aug-17 14

15. Results of the Brain Fingerprinting
test on Terry Harrington
The determination of the Brain
Fingerprinting test for alibi-
relevant information was
"information present,“ with a
confidence of 99.9%.
The information stored in
Harrington's brain did match the
scenario in which Harrington was
elsewhere (at a concert and with
friends) at the time of the crime.
11-Aug-17 15

16. 11-Aug-17 16
Applications
Test for several forms of employment,
especially in dealing with sensitive military
and foreign intelligence screening.
To detect symptoms of Alzheimer's
disease, Mental Depression and other
forms of dementia including neurological
disorders.
Individuals who were “information
present” and “information absent”
Criminal cases, Counter-Terrorism and
Security Testing

17. ADVANTAGES
11-Aug-17 17
The rate of error is extremely low virtually nonexistent and clear standards governing
Identifies the criminal quickly and scientifically
Record of 100% accuracy
Reduced costs and complexities.
Support the right to a speedy and fair trail.
Provides immediate scientific result

18. Limitations
Brain fingerprinting detects information-processing brain
responses that reveal what information is stored in the subject's
brain. It does not detect how that information got there.
Brain fingerprinting does not detect lies. It simply detects
information. No questions are asked or answered during a brain
fingerprinting test.
11-Aug-17 18

19. CONCLUSION
Brain Fingerprinting is a revolutionary new scientific technology for
solving crimes, identifying perpetrators, and exonerating innocent
suspects
With a record of 100% accuracy in research with US government
agencies, actual criminal cases, and other applications.
The technology fulfils an urgent need for governments, law
enforcement agencies, corporations, investigators, crime victims, and
falsely accused innocent suspects.
11-Aug-17 19

20. REFERENCE
1. The Brain Fingerprinting Technology, K. Logeshwari et.al
2. BRAIN FINGERPRINTING; ASHWINI V. SHARMA et.al
3. Farwell, L A (1992a) the Brain-Wave Information Detection (BID)
System
4. Farwell, L A (1992b) Two new twists on the truth detector: brain-
wave detection of occupational information. Psychophysiology.
5. Allen, J (2008). Not devoid of forensic potential, but... The American
Journal of Bioethics.
6. Farwell LA and Smith SS. Using Brain MERMER Testing To Detect
Concealed Knowledge Despite Efforts To Conceal Journal of
Forensic Sciences 2001
11-Aug-17 20

21. REFERENCE
1. Lander ES. DNA fingerprinting on trial. Nature 1989.
2. Simpson L. Courts Ready to Accept DNA Profiling As Evidence. Sydney
Mornin Herald 4 March 1989.
3. Lambourne GTC. The Use of Fingerprints in Identification. Med. Sci Law
1979.
4. Kasprzak J. Possibilities of Cheiloscopy. Forensic Sci Int. 1990
5. Allen, JJ, Mertens, R(2009) Limitations to the detection of deception:
true and false recollection are poorly distinguished using an event
related potential procedure.
6. Basar-Eroglu C, Basar E, Demiralp T, Schumann M (1992) P300-response:
possible psychophysiological correlates in delta and theta frequency
channels.
11-Aug-17 21

22. Acknowledgement
I express my sincere gratitude to
Prof. Baji.K, for his valuable guidance and assistance.
Staff Advisor of department of BT & BCE of 2014 2018 batch miss
Susmitha Kumari and other staffs in the department.
Hod of bt and bce, Dr. P.P. Thomas.
And my family members and my classmates
Last but not the least almighty for all his blessings.
11-Aug-17 22

23. Thanks..!!
11-Aug-17 23