Brain fingerprinting is a scientific technique that uses electroencephalography (EEG) to detect whether specific information is stored in a person's brain. It measures brain wave responses when presented with probes, targets, and irrelevant stimuli related to a crime. The technique was invented by Lawrence Farwell and is based on detecting the P300 brain response, also called the MERMER, which indicates recognition of known information. Brain fingerprinting has been admitted in courts and can help identify criminals, terrorists, and exonerate innocent suspects by detecting what information is stored in their brains.
Scientific Consensus on Brain Fingerprinting and Differing Views on the Scien...Karlos Svoboda
The following proposed Scientific Consensus on Brain fingerprinting has arisen from discussionsamong forensic scientists, legal experts, psychophysiologists, and experts in law enforcementand national security. These discussions were initiated by Lawrence A. Farwell. This is a workin progress. Discussions of these and other related issues are ongoing. Please refer commentsand suggestions to Lawrence A. Farwell at LFarwell@brainwavescience.com .The most fundamental point of consensus among scientists and other relevant experts regardingbrain fingerprinting, forensic science, and science in general is that different methods producedifferent results. Brain fingerprinting, from the seminal Farwell and Donchin (1986; 1991) andFarwell and Smith (2001) papers to the present, has never produced an error, neither a falsenegative nor a false positive. Some alternative methods of applying the same brain responses inattempts to detect concealed information have resulted in 10% to 15% errors and in some casesas high as nearly 50% errors, no better than chance. Even some purported “replications” ofFarwell and Donchin have in fact used fundamentally different methods. Consequently theyhave failed to achieve accuracy approaching that of brain fingerprinting and, unlike brainfingerprinting, are susceptible to countermeasures. These fundamental differences in scientificmethods are the reason why brain fingerprinting has been successfully applied in the field andruled admissible in court, and these alternative methods are unsuitable for field use or applicationin the criminal justice system or national security.In developing this consensus, we have specified precisely the standard scientific methods thatconstitute brain fingerprinting and attempted to identify the specific standards that are necessaryand sufficient to obtain the results that brain fingerprinting has consistently attained. We havesought to identify differences in methods that are responsible for the widely divergent resultsobtained in different laboratories conducting related research.Fundamental brain fingerprinting scientific principles, methods, and scientific standards arebriefly described the first section of this article. The proposed Scientific Consensus on BrainFingerprinting presumes a thorough understanding of the information contained therein. It alsoassumes familiarity with the articles in the literature cited in the Background section below.In the course of developing a consensus, some points have arisen on which there is considerablediversity of opinion. Some of these Differing Views on Brain Fingerprinting are briefly outlinedfollowing the Scientific Consensus on Brain Fingerprinting.
Brain Fingerprinting is a controversial forensic science technique that uses electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether specific information is stored in a subject's brain. It does this by measuring electrical brainwave responses to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen (Farwell & Smith 2001, Farwell, Richardson, and Richardson 2012).
Scientific Consensus on Brain Fingerprinting and Differing Views on the Scien...Karlos Svoboda
The following proposed Scientific Consensus on Brain fingerprinting has arisen from discussionsamong forensic scientists, legal experts, psychophysiologists, and experts in law enforcementand national security. These discussions were initiated by Lawrence A. Farwell. This is a workin progress. Discussions of these and other related issues are ongoing. Please refer commentsand suggestions to Lawrence A. Farwell at LFarwell@brainwavescience.com .The most fundamental point of consensus among scientists and other relevant experts regardingbrain fingerprinting, forensic science, and science in general is that different methods producedifferent results. Brain fingerprinting, from the seminal Farwell and Donchin (1986; 1991) andFarwell and Smith (2001) papers to the present, has never produced an error, neither a falsenegative nor a false positive. Some alternative methods of applying the same brain responses inattempts to detect concealed information have resulted in 10% to 15% errors and in some casesas high as nearly 50% errors, no better than chance. Even some purported “replications” ofFarwell and Donchin have in fact used fundamentally different methods. Consequently theyhave failed to achieve accuracy approaching that of brain fingerprinting and, unlike brainfingerprinting, are susceptible to countermeasures. These fundamental differences in scientificmethods are the reason why brain fingerprinting has been successfully applied in the field andruled admissible in court, and these alternative methods are unsuitable for field use or applicationin the criminal justice system or national security.In developing this consensus, we have specified precisely the standard scientific methods thatconstitute brain fingerprinting and attempted to identify the specific standards that are necessaryand sufficient to obtain the results that brain fingerprinting has consistently attained. We havesought to identify differences in methods that are responsible for the widely divergent resultsobtained in different laboratories conducting related research.Fundamental brain fingerprinting scientific principles, methods, and scientific standards arebriefly described the first section of this article. The proposed Scientific Consensus on BrainFingerprinting presumes a thorough understanding of the information contained therein. It alsoassumes familiarity with the articles in the literature cited in the Background section below.In the course of developing a consensus, some points have arisen on which there is considerablediversity of opinion. Some of these Differing Views on Brain Fingerprinting are briefly outlinedfollowing the Scientific Consensus on Brain Fingerprinting.
Brain Fingerprinting is a controversial forensic science technique that uses electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether specific information is stored in a subject's brain. It does this by measuring electrical brainwave responses to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen (Farwell & Smith 2001, Farwell, Richardson, and Richardson 2012).
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus Use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than they do when being truthful. Issues related to the use of such evidence in courts are discussed. The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in court.
In the field of criminology, a new lie detector has been developed in the United States of America. This is called “brain fingerprinting”. This invention is supposed to be the best lie detector available as on date and is said to detect even smooth criminals who pass the polygraph test (the conventional lie detector test) with ease. The new method employs brain waves, which are useful in detecting whether the person subjected to the test, remembers finer details of the crime. Even if the person willingly suppresses the necessary information, the brain wave is sure to trap him, according to the experts, who are very excited about the new kid on the block.
Fingerprinting is a controversial proposed investigative technique that measures recognition of familiar stimuli by measuring electrical brain wave responses to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen. Brain fingerprinting was invented by Lawrence Farwell. The theory is that the suspect's reaction to the details of an event or activity will reflect if the suspect had prior knowledge of the event or activity. This test uses what Farwell calls the MERMER ("Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response") response to detect familiarity reaction. One of the applications is lie detection. Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 120 tests, including tests on FBI agents, tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy, and tests on real-life situations including actual crimes.
Abstract:
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus Use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than they do when being truthful. Issues related to the use of such evidence in courts are discussed. The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in court.
In the field of criminology, a new lie detector has been developed in the United States of America. This is called “brain fingerprinting”. This invention is supposed to be the best lie detector available as on date and is said to detect even smooth criminals who pass the polygraph test (the conventional lie detector test) with ease. The new method employs brain waves, which are useful in detecting whether the person subjected to the test, remembers finer details of the crime. Even if the person willingly suppresses the necessary information, the brain wave is sure to trap him, according to the experts, who are very excited about the new kid on the block.
Introduction:
Brain Fingerprinting is a controversial proposed investigative technique that measures recognition of familiar stimuli by measuring electrical brain wave responses to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen. Brain fingerprinting was invented by Lawrence Farwell. The theory is that the suspect's reaction to the details of an event or activity will reflect if the suspect had prior knowledge of the event or activity. This test uses what Farwell calls the MERMER ("Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response") response to detect familiarity reaction. One of the applications is lie detection. Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 120 tests, including tests on FBI agents, tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy, and tests on real-life situations including actual crimes..
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than they do being truthful. Issue related to the use of such evidence in courtsare discussed.The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in court. In the field of criminology a new lie detector has been developed in USA. This is called “BRAIN FINGERPRINTING”.The invention is supposed to be the best lie detector even smooth criminals who paas the polygraph Test with ease.The new method employs brainwaves ,which are useful in detecting whether the person is subjected to test remember finer details of crime,even if the person willingly suppressesthe necessary information,the brain wave is sure to trap him ,according to the experts who are very excited about the new kid on the block.
Augmenting Speech-Language Rehabilitation with Brain Computer Interfaces: An ...HCI Lab
Presentation on Aug 7, 2015 in the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction #HCII2015 in Los Angeles, CA, USA. The paper was presented in the Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction track in the "Novel technologies for speech, language, attention and child development" session which was chaired by Prof. Margherita Antona, Foundation for Research & Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Greece http://2015.hci.international/friday
International Journal of Engineering Research and Development (IJERD)IJERD Editor
journal publishing, how to publish research paper, Call For research paper, international journal, publishing a paper, IJERD, journal of science and technology, how to get a research paper published, publishing a paper, publishing of journal, publishing of research paper, reserach and review articles, IJERD Journal, How to publish your research paper, publish research paper, open access engineering journal, Engineering journal, Mathemetics journal, Physics journal, Chemistry journal, Computer Engineering, Computer Science journal, how to submit your paper, peer reviw journal, indexed journal, reserach and review articles, engineering journal, www.ijerd.com, research journals,
yahoo journals, bing journals, International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, google journals, hard copy of journal
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus Use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than they do when being truthful. Issues related to the use of such evidence in courts are discussed. The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in court.
In the field of criminology, a new lie detector has been developed in the United States of America. This is called “brain fingerprinting”. This invention is supposed to be the best lie detector available as on date and is said to detect even smooth criminals who pass the polygraph test (the conventional lie detector test) with ease. The new method employs brain waves, which are useful in detecting whether the person subjected to the test, remembers finer details of the crime. Even if the person willingly suppresses the necessary information, the brain wave is sure to trap him, according to the experts, who are very excited about the new kid on the block.
Fingerprinting is a controversial proposed investigative technique that measures recognition of familiar stimuli by measuring electrical brain wave responses to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen. Brain fingerprinting was invented by Lawrence Farwell. The theory is that the suspect's reaction to the details of an event or activity will reflect if the suspect had prior knowledge of the event or activity. This test uses what Farwell calls the MERMER ("Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response") response to detect familiarity reaction. One of the applications is lie detection. Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 120 tests, including tests on FBI agents, tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy, and tests on real-life situations including actual crimes.
Abstract:
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus Use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than they do when being truthful. Issues related to the use of such evidence in courts are discussed. The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in court.
In the field of criminology, a new lie detector has been developed in the United States of America. This is called “brain fingerprinting”. This invention is supposed to be the best lie detector available as on date and is said to detect even smooth criminals who pass the polygraph test (the conventional lie detector test) with ease. The new method employs brain waves, which are useful in detecting whether the person subjected to the test, remembers finer details of the crime. Even if the person willingly suppresses the necessary information, the brain wave is sure to trap him, according to the experts, who are very excited about the new kid on the block.
Introduction:
Brain Fingerprinting is a controversial proposed investigative technique that measures recognition of familiar stimuli by measuring electrical brain wave responses to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen. Brain fingerprinting was invented by Lawrence Farwell. The theory is that the suspect's reaction to the details of an event or activity will reflect if the suspect had prior knowledge of the event or activity. This test uses what Farwell calls the MERMER ("Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response") response to detect familiarity reaction. One of the applications is lie detection. Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 120 tests, including tests on FBI agents, tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy, and tests on real-life situations including actual crimes..
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than they do being truthful. Issue related to the use of such evidence in courtsare discussed.The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in court. In the field of criminology a new lie detector has been developed in USA. This is called “BRAIN FINGERPRINTING”.The invention is supposed to be the best lie detector even smooth criminals who paas the polygraph Test with ease.The new method employs brainwaves ,which are useful in detecting whether the person is subjected to test remember finer details of crime,even if the person willingly suppressesthe necessary information,the brain wave is sure to trap him ,according to the experts who are very excited about the new kid on the block.
Augmenting Speech-Language Rehabilitation with Brain Computer Interfaces: An ...HCI Lab
Presentation on Aug 7, 2015 in the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction #HCII2015 in Los Angeles, CA, USA. The paper was presented in the Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction track in the "Novel technologies for speech, language, attention and child development" session which was chaired by Prof. Margherita Antona, Foundation for Research & Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Greece http://2015.hci.international/friday
International Journal of Engineering Research and Development (IJERD)IJERD Editor
journal publishing, how to publish research paper, Call For research paper, international journal, publishing a paper, IJERD, journal of science and technology, how to get a research paper published, publishing a paper, publishing of journal, publishing of research paper, reserach and review articles, IJERD Journal, How to publish your research paper, publish research paper, open access engineering journal, Engineering journal, Mathemetics journal, Physics journal, Chemistry journal, Computer Engineering, Computer Science journal, how to submit your paper, peer reviw journal, indexed journal, reserach and review articles, engineering journal, www.ijerd.com, research journals,
yahoo journals, bing journals, International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, google journals, hard copy of journal
Las TIC (Tecnologías de la Información Comunicativa) cada vez van cogiendo más fuerza y popularidad en nuestro entorno, por ello es bueno darle un buen manejo.
Most efficient slides on Brain Fingerprinting are listed here.
This is a technology which is most useful for forensic science.
A seminar based presentation is listed here
For any more details contact me-
0091-8943307844
or
nibelmd@gmail.com
Brain fingerprinting by ankit 2017............ankitg29
information about the brain fingerprinting technology . by EEG method by neuron firing and impulse of brain wave.P300 mean is 300-1000 m-sec brain wave, is better tech. than the polygraph test and other than than PET test. is basically depand the brain wave. is not the depand on the emotions and the pulse rate
4. What is Brain Fingerprinting?
Scientific technique to determine
whether or not specific information is
stored in an individual's brain
Relevant words, pictures or sounds
are presented to a subject by a
computer in a series with stimuli
The brainwave responses measured
using a patented headband equipped
with EEG sensors
6. INVENTION
• By Lawrence Farwell
• Based on electrical
signal, MERMER
• Farwell's brain
fingerprinting originally
used the well-
known P300 brain
response to detect the
brain's recognition of
the known information
7. Phases of Brain Fingerprinting
Crime Scene Evidence Collection
Brain Evidence collection
Computer Evidence Analysis
Scientific Result
9. • Farwell discovered the P300-MERMER
("Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted
Electroencephalographic Response")
• A MERMER is an electrical signal which is
part of the brainwave observed in response to
familiar information..
• When the brain recognizes something, then
there is increase in neurons activity, so elicit
some changes in brain wave signals .
10. Types of stimuli used
Probes
Life-experience related
Relevant to the investigated event -recognizable and
noteworthy only for the subjects who had participated in the
event (MERMER)
Indistinguishable from the Irrelevants for a subject who is
not knowledgeable about the situation under investigation
Targets
Push a button to indicate known image
Since the relatively rare Targets are singled out in the task
being performed, the Targets are noteworthy for the subject,
and each Target stimulus elicits a MERMER
Irrelevant Stimuli
information relevant to the crime that the suspect claims to
have no knowledge of
13. Picture or
word shown
to an
individual
•Triggers neurons of
brains
Generates
brain wave
P-300
Electric
potentials
accumulates
•Head gear fitted with electrodes on
scalp
MERMER
measured
EEG
Amplifier
Found
Guilty/ Not
guilty
Generates analog
signal
Study the data using
computer program
15. The Following figure shows the RED and BLUE lines are
closely correlated.
This indicates the suspect or the criminal has the knowledge of
the CRIME.
Information is absent Information is present
19. • Each electrode site is labeled with a letter
and a number.
• The letter refers to the area of brain
underlying the electrode
• e.g. F - Frontal lobe and T - Temporal
lobe.
• Even numbers denote the right side of
the head and
• Odd numbers the left side of the head.
EEG ELECTRODES
20. EEG RECORDING
Ask the
subject to
close his/her
eyes.
Select a
montage
Different sets of
electrode arrangement
on the scalp by 10 – 20
system is known as
montage.
21 electrodes are
attached to give 8
or 16 channels
recording.
Press the
calibration knob
to check
voltages & time
constant.
Always observe
subject for any
abnormal muscle
activity.
Ask the subject to
open eyes for 10
sec.and ask him/her
to close eyes
Do this procedure
for several times in
each montage
21. ANALYSIS OF EEG
• Electrical activity from the brain consist of
primarily of rhythms.
• They are named according to their frequencies
(Hz) and amplitude in micro volt (μv).
• Different rhythms at different ages and
different conditions (level of consciousness)
• Usually one dominant frequency
(background rhythm)
22. VIDEO MONITORING
Simultaneous video monitoring of the patient during the EEG recording is
becoming more popular. It allows the physician to closely correlate EEG
waveforms with the patients activity and may help produce a more
accurate diagnosis.
23. EVENT RELATED POTENTIALS(ERP)
• Triggered by particular stimuli- called evoked
potentials
• Visual, auditory or somatosensory
• Early ERPs of latency below 10–12 ms (far fields)
• Late ERPs – endogenous and exogenous
components
• P300 – Memory representations are updated
• ERPs caused by continuous stimuli – analyzed in
frequency domain
• Desynchronization in EEG, during the movement
• Increased activity in high frequencies
• Visible in EEG
24. EEG ANALYSIS
Visual inspection of signals
Statistical properties can be evaluated by typical methods
based on the theory of stochastic signals
Analyzed in the time or frequency domain, and one or
several channels can be analyzed at a time
Spectral analysis by Fourier Transform (FT),
autoregressive (AR) or autoregressive-moving average
(ARMA) parametric models, Kalman filters, and time-
frequency and time-scale methods
Post processing include cluster analysis, discriminant
analysis, or artificial neural networks (ANN).
Estimation of power spectra using Fast Fourier
Transform
25. AR model represents a filter with a white noise at the input
and the EEG series at the output
Interdependence between two EEG signals can be found
by a cross-correlation function
The cross covariance functions have been extensively used
in the analysis of event-related potentials for the study of
the electrophysiological correlates of cognitive functions
Wavelet transform (WT) describes signals in terms of
coefficients representing their energy content in specified
time-frequency region
ANN are constructed from artificial neurons (or units),
which produce the output depending on the sum of
weighted inputs from other units
EEG ANALYSIS
26. CURRENT USES AND
APPLICATIONS
Test for several forms of employment, especially in dealing
with sensitive military and foreign intelligence screening
Individuals who were ‘information present’ and
‘information absent’
A group of 17FBI agents and4 non-agents were exposed to
stimuli
To detect symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease, Mental
depression and other forms of dementia including
neurological disorders
Criminal cases and counter-terrorism
Advertisements
Security testing
27. APPLICATIONS
Criminal justice
The key difference between a guilty party and
an innocent suspect is that the perpetrator of the
crime has a record of the crime stored in their brain,
and the innocent suspect does not. Until the
invention of brain fingerprinting testing, there was
no scientifically valid way to detect this fundamental
difference
28. Counter terrorism
Aid in determining who has participated in terrorist
acts, directly or indirectly
Aid in identifying trained terrorists with the potential to
commit future terrorist acts, even if they are in a
“sleeper” cell and have not been active for years.
Help to identify people who have knowledge or training
in banking, finance or communications and who are
associated with terrorist teams and acts
Help to determine if an individual is in a leadership role
within a terrorist organization.
APPLICATIONS
29. Medical field
Research has now demonstrated that analysis
of the P300 brainwave can show dementia onset and
progression. Mermer technology, developed and
patented by Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories,
includes the P300 and extends it, providing a more
sensitive measure than the P300 alone.
With early diagnosis, the progression of Alzheimer’s
symptoms can often be delayed through medications
and dietary and lifestyle changes.
APPLICATIONS
30. Advertising applications
What specific information do people retain from
advertising?
What specific elements in an ad campaign have the most
impact?
Which type of media is most effective?
What commercial is the most effective for a single
product?
How effective is the product branding strategy?
How effective is an ad campaign in different parts of the
world?
What is the correlation between the campaign and the point
of sale?
How do the effects of campaigns vary with the influence of
time?
APPLICATIONS
31. COMPARISON WITH OTHER
TECHNOLOGIES
• Conventional fingerprinting and DNA match
physical evidence from a crime scene with
evidence on the person of the perpetrator
• Brain fingerprinting matches informational
evidence from the crime scene with evidence
stored in the brain.
• Fingerprints and DNA are available in only 1%
of crimes. The brain is always there, planning,
executing, and recording the suspect's actions
• As with DNA and fingerprints, the results are
the same whether the person has lied or told the
truth at any time
32. ROLE OF BRAIN
FINGERPRINTING IN CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS
• Four phases
1. Investigation- by skilled investigator
2. Interview- by Investigator or scientist
3. Scientific testing- by scientist
4. Adjudication- by judge and jury
33. Admissibility In Courts
Brain fingerprinting has been thoroughly and
scientifically tested.
The theory and application of brain fingerprinting
have been subject to peer review and publication.
The rate of error is extremely low -- virtually
nonexistent -- and clear standards governing
scientific techniques of operation of the
technology have been established and published
The theory and practice of brain fingerprinting
have gained general acceptance in the relevant
scientific community.
Brain fingerprinting is non-invasive and non-
testimonial
34. ADVANTAGES
Identify criminals quickly and scientifically
Record of 100% accuracy
Identify terrorists and members of gangs,
criminal and intelligence organizations
Reduce expenditure of money and other
resources in Law enforcement
Reduce evasion of justice
35. LIMITATIONS
It does not detect how that information got there.
Detects only information, not intent
Where the suspect knows everything that the investigators can ask.
Authorities have no information about what crime may have taken place
General pre-employment or employee screening where in any number of
undesirable activities or intentions may be relevant.
Only detect information, not lies
Does not determine whether a suspect is guilty or not. Determined by
judge and jury
Limitations of human memory and factors affecting it.
36. Conclusion
• Brain fingerprinting is a revolutionary new
scientific technology for solving crimes,
identifying perpetrator and exonerating
innocent suspects.
• This technology fulfills an urgent need for
governments, law enforcements agencies,
corporations, investigators and crime victims.
37. References
1. Farwell LA (1992a). The brain-wave information detection (BID)
system: A new paradigm for psycho physiological detection of
information (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Urbana-
Champaign (IL): University of Illinois.
2. Farwell LA (1993). Brain MERMERs: Detection of FBI Agents and
crime-relevant information with the Farwell MERA system.
Proceedings of the International Security Systems Symposium,
Washington, D.C.
3. PBS Innovation Series (2004). Brain Fingerprinting May 4, 2004.
Brain Fingerprinting: Ask the Experts. Accessed July 20, 2008.
4. Simon S (2005). What you don't know can't hurt you. Law
Enforcement Technology, Sept., 2005.
5. Rosenfeld JP, Soskins M, Bosh G, Ryan A (2004). Simple, Effective
Counter measures to P300-based Tests of Detection of Concealed
Information. Psychophysiol., 41: 205–219.