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 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 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.
Brain Fingerprinting is scientific technique to determine whether or not specific information is stored in an individual's brain.
Ruled Admissible in one US Court as scientific evidence.
It has a record of 100% Accuracy.
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.
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 a technique used to determine scientifically what information is, or is not stored in a particular brain.
Brain Finger Printing was invented by Dr B .S. Farwell chief scientist and president of human brain research and laboratory , USA
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 is 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. 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 felony 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 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.
Brain Fingerprinting is scientific technique to determine whether or not specific information is stored in an individual's brain.
Ruled Admissible in one US Court as scientific evidence.
It has a record of 100% Accuracy.
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.
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 a technique used to determine scientifically what information is, or is not stored in a particular brain.
Brain Finger Printing was invented by Dr B .S. Farwell chief scientist and president of human brain research and laboratory , USA
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 is 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. 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 felony 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 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.
REVIEW: Previous Deception detection methods and New proposed method using in...IJERA Editor
Deception detection has important legal and medical applications, but the reliability of methods for the differentiation between truthful and deceptive responses is still limited. Deception detection can be more accurately achieved by measuring the brain correlates of lying in an individual. For the evaluation of the method, several participants were gone through the designed concealed information test paradigm and their respective brain signals were recorded. The electroencephalogram (EEG) signals were recorded and separated into many single trials. To enhance signal noise ratio (SNR) of P3 components, the independent component analysis (ICA) method was adopted to separate non-P3 (i.e. artifacts) and P3 components from every single trial. Then the P3 waveforms with high SNR were reconstructed. And then group of features based on time, frequency, and amplitude were extracted from the reconstructed P3 waveforms. Finally, two different class of feature samples were used to train a support vector machine (SVM) classifier because it has higher performance compared with several other classifiers. The method presented in this paper improves the efficiency of CIT and deception detection in comparison with previous reported methods.
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
What is sensitive skin?
It is a large area flexible array of sensors, with data processing capabilities, with the ability to sense the surroundings.
It make possible the use of unsupervised machine in our midst.
Machines in unstructured environments
Societal needs and concerns
a) Health industry
b) Eco friendly
c) Difficulties of acceptance
Blue Gene_SM
Introduction
The word "supercomputer" entered the mainstream lexicon in 1996 and 1997 when IBM's Deep Blue supercomputer challenged the world chess champion in two tournaments broadcast around the world.
Since then, IBM has been busy improving its supercomputer technology and tackling much deeper problems.
Their latest project, code named Blue Gene, is poised to shatter all records for computer and network performance.
What is a Super Computer
A supercomputer is a computer that is at the frontline of current processing capacity, particularly speed of calculation.
Today, supercomputers are typically one-of-a-kind custom designs produced by "traditional" companies such as Cray, IBM and Hewlett-Packard, who had purchased many of the 1980s companies to gain their experience.
Why we need Super Computers
Supercomputers are very useful in highly calculation-intensive tasks such as
Problems involving quantum physics,
Weather forecasting,
Climate research,
Molecular modeling (computing the structures and properties of chemical compounds, biological macromolecules, polymers, and crystals),
Physical simulations (such as simulation of airplanes in wind tunnels, simulation of the detonation of nuclear weapons, and research into nuclear fusion).
Why we need Super Computers
Also, they are useful for a particular class of problems, known as Grand Challenge problems, full solution for such problems require semi-infinite computing resources.
NASA™s Linux-based Super Computer
Why Supercomputers are Fast
Several elements of a supercomputer contribute to its high level of performance:
Numerous high-performance processors (CPUs) for parallel processing
Specially-designed high-speed internal networks
Specially-designed or tuned operating systems
What is Blue gene
Blue Gene is a computer architecture project designed to produce several supercomputers that are designed to reach operating speeds in the PFLOPS (petaFLOPS = 1015) range, and currently reaching sustained speeds of nearly 500 TFLOPS (teraFLOPS = 1012).
It is a cooperative project among IBM(particularly IBM Rochester and the Thomas J. Watson Research Center), the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the United States Department of Energy (which is partially funding the project), and academia.
Why Blue Gene
Blue Gene is an IBM Research project dedicated to exploring the
frontiers in supercomputing:
in computer architecture,
in the software required to program and control massively parallel systems, and
in the use of computation to advance the understanding of important biological processes such as protein folding.
Learning more about biomolecular mechanisms is expected to give medical researchers better understanding of diseases, as well as potential cures.
Why the name Blue gene
Blue - The corporate color of IBM
Gene - The intended use of the Blue Gene clusters was for Computational biology.
Blue Gene Projects
Blue Gene_SM
Introduction
The word "supercomputer" entered the mainstream lexicon in 1996 and 1997 when IBM's Deep Blue supercomputer challenged the world chess champion in two tournaments broadcast around the world.
Since then, IBM has been busy improving its supercomputer technology and tackling much deeper problems.
Their latest project, code named Blue Gene, is poised to shatter all records for computer and network performance.
What is a Super Computer
A supercomputer is a computer that is at the frontline of current processing capacity, particularly speed of calculation.
Today, supercomputers are typically one-of-a-kind custom designs produced by "traditional" companies such as Cray, IBM and Hewlett-Packard, who had purchased many of the 1980s companies to gain their experience.
Why we need Super Computers
Supercomputers are very useful in highly calculation-intensive tasks such as
Problems involving quantum physics,
Weather forecasting,
Climate research,
Molecular modeling (computing the structures and properties of chemical compounds, biological macromolecules, polymers, and crystals),
Physical simulations (such as simulation of airplanes in wind tunnels, simulation of the detonation of nuclear weapons, and research into nuclear fusion).
Why we need Super Computers
Also, they are useful for a particular class of problems, known as Grand Challenge problems, full solution for such problems require semi-infinite computing resources.
NASA™s Linux-based Super Computer
Why Supercomputers are Fast
Several elements of a supercomputer contribute to its high level of performance:
Numerous high-performance processors (CPUs) for parallel processing
Specially-designed high-speed internal networks
Specially-designed or tuned operating systems
What is Blue gene
Blue Gene is a computer architecture project designed to produce several supercomputers that are designed to reach operating speeds in the PFLOPS (petaFLOPS = 1015) range, and currently reaching sustained speeds of nearly 500 TFLOPS (teraFLOPS = 1012).
It is a cooperative project among IBM(particularly IBM Rochester and the Thomas J. Watson Research Center), the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the United States Department of Energy (which is partially funding the project), and academia.
Why Blue Gene
Blue Gene is an IBM Research project dedicated to exploring the
frontiers in supercomputing:
in computer architecture,
in the software required to program and control massively parallel systems, and
in the use of computation to advance the understanding of important biological processes such as protein folding.
Learning more about biomolecular mechanisms is expected to give medical researchers better understanding of diseases, as well as potential cures.
Why the name Blue gene
Blue - The corporate color of IBM
Gene - The intended use of the Blue Gene clusters was for Computational biology.
Blue Gene Projects
There
Smart Note Taker is a helpful product that satisfies the needs of the people in today's technologic and fast life. This product can be used in many ways. The Smart Note Taker provides taking fast and easy note making to people who are busy with one's self.
With the help of Smart Note Taker, people will be able to write notes in air, while being busy with their work. The written note will be stored in the memory chip of the pen, and will be able to read in digital medium after the job is done. This saves time and facilitate life.
This product is simple but powerful. It has the ability to sense 3D shapes and motions that the user tries to draw. The sensed information will be processed and transferred to the memory chip and then will be monitored on the display device. The shape that is drawn can be broadcasted to the network or sent to a mobile device.
Smart Note Taker is a helpful product that satisfies the needs of the people in today's technologic and fast life. This product can be used in many ways. The Smart Note Taker provides taking fast and easy note making to people who are busy with one's self.
With the help of Smart Note Taker, people will be able to write notes in air, while being busy with their work. The written note will be stored in the memory chip of the pen, and will be able to read in digital medium after the job is done. This saves time and facilitate life.
This product is simple but powerful. It has the ability to sense 3D shapes and motions that the user tries to draw. The sensed information will be processed and transferred to the memory chip and then will be monitored on the display device. The shape that is drawn can be broadcasted to the network or sent to a mobile device.
W
hether you’re using wireless internet in a coffee shop,stealing it from the guy next door, or competing for bandwidth at a conference, you have probably gotten frustrated at the slow speeds you face when more than one device is tapped into the network. As more and more people and their manydevices access wireless internet, clogged airwaves are going tomake it.
One German physicist, Harald Haas has come up with asolution he calls “data through illumination” –taking the fibberout of fiber optic by sending data through an LED light bulbthat varies in intensity faster than the human eye can follow.It’s the same idea band behind infrared remote controls but farmore powerful.
Haas says his invention, which he calls D-Light,can produce data rates faster than 10 megabits persecond, which is speedier than your average broadbandconnection. He envisions a future where data for laptops,smart phones, and tablets is transmitted through the light in aroom. And security would be snap – if you can’t see the light,you can’t access the data.
Li-Fi is typically implemented using white LED light bulbs at the downlink transmitter. These devices are normally used for illumination only by applying a constant current. However, by fast and subtle variations of the current, the optical output can be made to vary at extremely high speeds. This very property of optical current is used in Li-Fi setup.The operational procedure is very simple-,data from the internet and local network is used to modulate the intensity of the LED light source if any undetectable to the human eye. The photo detector picks up signal, which is converted back into a data stream and sent to the client.
The client can communicate through its own LED output or over the existing network. An overhead lamp fitted with an LED with signal-processing technology streams data embedded in its beam at ultra-high speeds to the photo-detector. A receiver dongle then converts the tiny changes in amplitude into an electrical signal, which is then converted back into a data stream and transmitted to a computer or mobile device.
Li-Fi is transmission of data through illumination by taking thefiber out of fiber optics by sending data through a LED lightbulb that varies in intensity faster than the human eye canfollow.
“At the heart of this technology is a newgeneration of high brightness light-emitting diodes”, saysHarald Haas from the University of Edinburgh, UK.”Verysimply, if the LED is on, you transmit a digital 1,
if it’s offyou transmit a 0,”Haas says, “They can be switched on and offvery quickly, which gives nice opportunities for transmitteddata.”
It is possible to encode data in the light by varying therate at which the LEDs flicker on and off to give differentstrings of 1s and 0s.The LED intensity is modulated so rapidlythat human eye cannot notice, so the output appears constant.
More sophisticated techniques could dramatically increaseVLC data rate. Terms at the University of Oxford and theUniversity of Edinburgh are focusing on parallel datatransmission using array of LEDs, where each LED transmits a different data stream. Other groups are using mixtures of red,green and blue LEDs to alter the light frequency encoding adifferent data channel.
Li-Fi, as it has been dubbed, has alreadyachieved blisteringly high speed in the lab. Researchers at theHeinrich Hertz Institute in Berlin, Germany have reached datarates of over 500 megabytes per second using a standardwhite-light LED.
Li-Fi is typically implemented using white LED light bulbs at the downlink transmitter. These devices are normally used for illumination only by applying a constant current. However, by fast and subtle variations of the current, the optical output can be made to vary at extremely high speeds. This very property of optical current is used in Li-Fi setup.The operational procedure is very simple-,data from the internet and local network is used to modulate the intensity of the LED light source if any undetectable to the human eye. The photo detector picks up signal, which is converted back into a data stream and sent to the client.
The client can communicate through its own LED output or over the existing network. An overhead lamp fitted with an LED with signal-processing technology streams data embedded in its beam at ultra-high speeds to the photo-detector. A receiver dongle then converts the tiny changes in amplitude into an electrical signal, which is then converted back into a data stream and transmitted to a computer or mobile device.
State of ICS and IoT Cyber Threat Landscape Report 2024 previewPrayukth K V
The IoT and OT threat landscape report has been prepared by the Threat Research Team at Sectrio using data from Sectrio, cyber threat intelligence farming facilities spread across over 85 cities around the world. In addition, Sectrio also runs AI-based advanced threat and payload engagement facilities that serve as sinks to attract and engage sophisticated threat actors, and newer malware including new variants and latent threats that are at an earlier stage of development.
The latest edition of the OT/ICS and IoT security Threat Landscape Report 2024 also covers:
State of global ICS asset and network exposure
Sectoral targets and attacks as well as the cost of ransom
Global APT activity, AI usage, actor and tactic profiles, and implications
Rise in volumes of AI-powered cyberattacks
Major cyber events in 2024
Malware and malicious payload trends
Cyberattack types and targets
Vulnerability exploit attempts on CVEs
Attacks on counties – USA
Expansion of bot farms – how, where, and why
In-depth analysis of the cyber threat landscape across North America, South America, Europe, APAC, and the Middle East
Why are attacks on smart factories rising?
Cyber risk predictions
Axis of attacks – Europe
Systemic attacks in the Middle East
Download the full report from here:
https://sectrio.com/resources/ot-threat-landscape-reports/sectrio-releases-ot-ics-and-iot-security-threat-landscape-report-2024/
Encryption in Microsoft 365 - ExpertsLive Netherlands 2024Albert Hoitingh
In this session I delve into the encryption technology used in Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Purview. Including the concepts of Customer Key and Double Key Encryption.
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object CalisthenicsDorra BARTAGUIZ
After immersing yourself in the blue book and its red counterpart, attending DDD-focused conferences, and applying tactical patterns, you're left with a crucial question: How do I ensure my design is effective? Tactical patterns within Domain-Driven Design (DDD) serve as guiding principles for creating clear and manageable domain models. However, achieving success with these patterns requires additional guidance. Interestingly, we've observed that a set of constraints initially designed for training purposes remarkably aligns with effective pattern implementation, offering a more ‘mechanical’ approach. Let's explore together how Object Calisthenics can elevate the design of your tactical DDD patterns, offering concrete help for those venturing into DDD for the first time!
Slack (or Teams) Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Soluti...Jeffrey Haguewood
Sidekick Solutions uses Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions Apricot) and automation solutions to integrate data for business workflows.
We believe integration and automation are essential to user experience and the promise of efficient work through technology. Automation is the critical ingredient to realizing that full vision. We develop integration products and services for Bonterra Case Management software to support the deployment of automations for a variety of use cases.
This video focuses on the notifications, alerts, and approval requests using Slack for Bonterra Impact Management. The solutions covered in this webinar can also be deployed for Microsoft Teams.
Interested in deploying notification automations for Bonterra Impact Management? Contact us at sales@sidekicksolutionsllc.com to discuss next steps.
Neuro-symbolic is not enough, we need neuro-*semantic*Frank van Harmelen
Neuro-symbolic (NeSy) AI is on the rise. However, simply machine learning on just any symbolic structure is not sufficient to really harvest the gains of NeSy. These will only be gained when the symbolic structures have an actual semantics. I give an operational definition of semantics as “predictable inference”.
All of this illustrated with link prediction over knowledge graphs, but the argument is general.
GraphRAG is All You need? LLM & Knowledge GraphGuy Korland
Guy Korland, CEO and Co-founder of FalkorDB, will review two articles on the integration of language models with knowledge graphs.
1. Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmap.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08302
2. Microsoft Research's GraphRAG paper and a review paper on various uses of knowledge graphs:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/graphrag-unlocking-llm-discovery-on-narrative-private-data/
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...UiPathCommunity
💥 Speed, accuracy, and scaling – discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Mining™:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing – with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs – GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
👨🏫 Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
👩🏫 Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using Deplo...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
Builder.ai Founder Sachin Dev Duggal's Strategic Approach to Create an Innova...Ramesh Iyer
In today's fast-changing business world, Companies that adapt and embrace new ideas often need help to keep up with the competition. However, fostering a culture of innovation takes much work. It takes vision, leadership and willingness to take risks in the right proportion. Sachin Dev Duggal, co-founder of Builder.ai, has perfected the art of this balance, creating a company culture where creativity and growth are nurtured at each stage.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 3DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 3. In this session, we will cover desktop automation along with UI automation.
Topics covered:
UI automation Introduction,
UI automation Sample
Desktop automation flow
Pradeep Chinnala, Senior Consultant Automation Developer @WonderBotz and UiPath MVP
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
How world-class product teams are winning in the AI era by CEO and Founder, P...
Brain fingerprinting detail report
1. Topic: BRAIN FINGERPRINTING
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..
2. What is Brain Fingerprinting?
Brain Fingerprinting is designed to determine whether an individual recognizes specific
information related to an event or activity by measuring electrical brain wave responses
to words, phrases, or pictures presented on a computer screen. The technique can be
applied only in situations where investigators have a sufficient amount of specific
information about an event or activity that would be known only to the perpetrator and
investigator. In this respect, Brain Fingerprinting is considered a type of Guilty
Knowledge Test, where the "guilty" party is expected to react strongly to the relevant
detail
of
the
event
of
activity.
Existing (polygraph) procedures for assessing the validity of a suspect's "guilty"
knowledge rely on measurement of autonomic arousal (e.g., palm sweating and heart
rate), while Brain Fingerprinting measures electrical brain activity via a fitted headband
containing special sensors. Brain Fingerprinting is said to be more accurate in detecting
"guilty" knowledge distinct from the false positives of traditional polygraph methods, but
this is hotly disputed by specialized researchers.
Technique:
The person to be tested wears a special headband with electronic sensors that measure
the electroencephalography from several locations on the scalp. In order to calibrate the
brain fingerprinting system, the testee is presented with a series of irrelevant stimuli,
words, and pictures, and a series of relevant stimuli, words, and pictures. The test
subject's brain response to these two different types of stimuli allow the testor to
determine if the measured brain responses to test stimuli, called probes, are more similar
to the relevant or irrelevant responses.
The technique uses the well known fact that an electrical signal known as P300 is emitted
from an individual's brain approximately 300 milliseconds after it is confronted with a
stimulus of special significance, e.g. a rare vs. a common stimuls or a stimulas the
proband is asked to count. The novel interpretation in brain fingerprinting is to look for
P300 as response to stimuli related to the crime in question e.g., a murder weapon or a
victim's face. Because it is based on EEG signals, the system does not require the testee
to issue verbal responses to questions or stimuli.
Brain fingerprinting uses cognitive brain responses, brain fingerprinting does not depend
on the emotions of the subject, nor is it affected by emotional responses. Brain
fingerprinting is fundamentally different from the polygraph (lie-detector), which
measures emotion-based physiological signals such as heart rate, sweating, and blood
pressure. Also, unlike polygraph testing, it does not attempt to determine whether or not
the subject is lying or telling the truth.
3. Four phases of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting:
In fingerprinting and DNA fingerprinting, evidence recognized and collected at the crime
scene, and preserved properly until a suspect is apprehended, is scientifically compared
with evidence on the person of the suspect to detect a match that would place the suspect
at the crime scene. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting works similarly, except that the evidence
collected both at the crime scene and on the person of the suspect (i.e., in the brain as
revealed by electrical brain responses) is informational evidence rather than physical
evidence. There are four stages to Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, which are similar to the
steps in fingerprinting and DNA fingerprinting:
1. Brain Fingerprinting Crime Scene Evidence Collection;
2. Brain Fingerprinting Brain Evidence Collection;
3. Brain Fingerprinting Computer Evidence Analysis; and
4. Brain Fingerprinting Scientific Result.
In the Crime Scene Evidence Collection, an expert in Farwell Brain Fingerprinting
examines the crime scene and other evidence connected with the crime to identify details
4. of the crime that would be known only to the perpetrator. The expert then conducts the
Brain Evidence Collection in order to determine whether or not the evidence from the
crime scene matches evidence stored in the brain of the suspect. In the Computer
Evidence Analysis, the Farwell Brain Fingerprinting system makes a mathematical
determination as to whether or not this specific evidence is stored in the brain, and
computes a statistical confidence for that determination. This determination and statistical
confidence constitute the Scientific Result of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting: either
"information present" – the details of the crime are stored in the brain of the suspect – or
"information absent" – the details of the crime are not stored in the brain of the suspect.
Applications:
Counter terrorism:
Brain fingerprinting can help address the following critical elements in
the fight against terrorism:
1: Aid in determining who has participated in terrorist acts, directly or indirectly.
2: 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.
3: Help to identify people who have knowledge or training in banking, finance or
communications and who are associated with terrorist teams and acts.
4: Help to determine if an individual is in a leadership role within a terrorist organization.
Brain fingerprinting technology is based on the principle that the brain is central to all
human acts. In a terrorist act, there may or may not be peripheral evidence such as
fingerprints or DNA, but the brain of the perpetrator is always there, planning, executing,
and recording the crime. The terrorist has knowledge of organizations, training and plans
that an innocent person does not have. Until the invention of Brain Fingerprinting testing,
there was no scientific way to detect this fundamental difference.
Brain Fingerprinting testing provides an accurate, economical and timely solution to the
central problem in the fight against terrorism. It is now possible to determine
scientifically whether or not a person has terrorist training and knowledge of terrorist
activities.
With the Brain Fingerprinting system, a significant scientific breakthrough has now
become a practical applied technology. A new era in security and intelligence gathering
has begun. Now, terrorists and those supporting terrorism can be identified quickly and
accurately. No longer should any terrorist be able to evade justice for lack of evidence.
5. And there is no reason why an innocent individual should be falsely imprisoned or
convicted of terrorist activity. A Brain Fingerprinting test can determine with an
extremely high degree of accuracy those who are involved with terrorist activity and
those who are not.
Criminal justice:
A critical task of the criminal justice system is to determine who has committed a crime.
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.
Brain Fingerprinting testing does not prove guilt or innocence. That is the role of a judge
and jury. This exciting technology gives the judge and jury new, scientifically valid
evidence to help them arrive at their decision. DNA evidence and fingerprints are
available in only about 1% of major crimes. It is estimated that Brain Fingerprinting
testing will apply in approximately 60 to 70% of these major crimes. The impacts on the
criminal justice system will be profound. The potential now exists to significantly
improve the speed and accuracy of the entire system, from investigations to parole
hearings. Brain Fingerprinting testing will be able to dramatically reduce the costs
associated with investigating and prosecuting innocent people and allow law enforcement
professionals to concentrate on suspects who have verifiable, detailed knowledge of the
crimes.
Medical:
‘Brain Fingerprinting’ is the patented technology that can measure objectively, for the
first time, how memory and cognitive functioning of Alzheimer sufferers are affected by
medications. First generation tests have proven to be more accurate than other routinely
used tests, and could be commercially available in 18-24 months.
The 30 minute test involves wearing a headband with built-in electrodes; technicians then
present words, phrases and images that are both known and unknown to the patient to
determine whether information that should be in the brain is still there. When presented
with familiar information, the brain responds by producing MERMERs, specific
increases in neuron activity. The technician can use this response to measure how quickly
6. information is disappearing from the brain and whether the drugs they are taking are
slowing down the process.
Additional Applications:
In advertising, Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories will offer significant advances in
measuring campaign and media effectiveness. Most advertising programs today are
evaluated subjectively using focus groups. We will be able to offer significantly more
advanced, scientific methods to help determine the effectiveness of campaigns and be
very cost competitive with current methodologies. This technology will be able to help
determine what information is actually retained in memory by individuals. For example,
in a branding campaign do people remember the brand, the product, etc. and how do the
results vary with demographics? We will also be able to measure the comparative
effectiveness of multiple media types.
In the insurance industry, Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories will be able to help
reduce the incidence of insurance fraud by determining if an individual has knowledge of
fraudulent or criminal acts. The same type of testing can help to determine if an
individual has specific knowledge related to computer crimes where there is typically no
witness or physical evidence.
Case studies:
The biggest breakthrough, according to Farwell, was its role in freeing
convicted murderer Terry Harrington, who had been serving a life sentence in Iowa State
Penitentiary for killing a night watchman in 1977. In 2001, Harrington requested a new
trial on several grounds, including conflicting testimony in the original trial.
Farwell was faced with an immediate and obvious problem: 24 years had passed since the
trial. Evidence had been presented and transcripts published long ago; the details of the
crime had long since come to light. What memories of the crime were left to probe? But
Farwell combed the transcripts and came up with obscure details about which to test
Harrington. Harrington was granted a new trial when it was discovered that some of the
original police reports in the case had been missing at his initial trial. By 2001, however,
most of the witnesses against Harrington had either died or had been discredited. Finally,
when a key witness heard that Harrington had "passed" his brain fingerprinting test, he
recanted his testimony and the prosecution threw up its hands. Harrington was set free.
7. In Macon County, Mo., Sheriff Robert Dawson learned about the method from his
secretary, who had also seen it featured on television. In 1999, Dawson ordered a test on
J. B. Grinder, accused of raping and murdering a 25-year-old woman. Grinder had
admitted and denied the allegations so many times that, according to Dawson, "We didn't
know what to believe anymore." Confronted with the test results, which seemed to
confirm one of Grinder's many confessions, Grinder pled guilty to the charges and also
admitted to killing three other girls in Arkansas. When another murder investigation ran
into problems earlier this year, Dawson turned again to brain fingerprinting. He refrained
from discussing the details of the case with the suspect and with the media so that the
P300 probes would be valid. While the suspect denied knowing anything about the case,
Farwell's test suggested otherwise.
Comparison with other technologies:
Conventional fingerprinting and DNA match physical evidence from a crime scene with
evidence on the person of the perpetrator. Similarly, Brain Fingerprinting matches
informational evidence from the crime scene with evidence stored in the brain.
8. Fingerprints and DNA are available in only 1% of crimes. The brain is always there,
planning, executing, and recording the suspect's actions.
Brain Fingerprinting has nothing to do with lie detection. Rather, it is a scientific way to
determine if someone has committed a specific crime or other act. No questions are asked
and no answers are given during Farwell Brain Fingerprinting. As with DNA and
fingerprints, the results are the same whether the person has lied or told the truth at any
time.
Admissibility of Brain Fingerprinting in court:
The admissibility of Brain Fingerprinting in court has not yet been established. The
following well established features of Brain Fingerprinting, however, will be relevant
when the question of admissibility is tested in court. 1) Brain Fingerprinting has been
thoroughly and scientifically tested. 2) The theory and application of Brain Fingerprinting
have been subject to peer review and publication. 3) 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. 4) The theory and practice of
Brain Fingerprinting have gained general acceptance in the relevant scientific
community. 5) Brain Fingerprinting is non-invasive and non-testimonial.
Record of 100% Accuracy
At the time of this first field application, Dr. Farwell's successes in the scientific
laboratory with his invention were already well known. In collaboration with FBI
scientist Dr. Drew Richardson, Dr. Farwell achieved 100% accuracy in using Farwell
Brain Fingerprinting to identify FBI agents based on their brain responses to words and
phrases only an FBI agent would recognize. Tests conducted by Dr. Farwell for the US
Navy in collaboration with Navy LCDR Rene S. Hernandez, Ph.D., also resulted in 100%
accurate results. In research on contract with a US government intelligence agency,
Farwell Brain Fingerprinting achieved 100% accuracy in proving the presence or absence
of a wide variety of evidence stored in the brains of individuals involved in over 120
cases. Dr. Farwell has published extensively in the scientific literature and presented his
research to many scientific and technical audiences throughout the world . Farwell Brain
Fingerprinting has been subjected to rigorous peer review under US government
sponsorship, and has been found scientifically viable as well as revolutionary in its
implications.
9. 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 fulfills an urgent need for governments, law enforcement
agencies, corporations, investigators, crime victims, and falsely accused, innocent
suspects.
References:
10. 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 fulfills an urgent need for governments, law enforcement
agencies, corporations, investigators, crime victims, and falsely accused, innocent
suspects.
References: