BCI lets completely “locked-in” man communicate(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
BCI lets completely “locked-in” man communicate
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/04/bci-lets-completely-locked-in-man-communicate-with-his-son-ask-for-a-beer/
110 comments
Sorry for your loss. This was very touching and you are a good son for being there in their time of need.
Life is so unfair, thank you for sharing your story
“…and for his caretakers to play his favorite band, Tool, very loud. But it's the communications with his young son that tug at the heartstrings…”
I dunno, the request for Tool, very loud gets me a little misty eyed.
I dunno, the request for Tool, very loud gets me a little misty eyed.
This may work or may not. But the two researchers seemed not to be that honest in the past. [0] They probably try to restate authority...
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02862-4/
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02862-4/
Wow this is terrible, I hope this technology isn’t affected by his lack of morals for locked in patients’ sake.
Wasn’t communicating with locked-in people a big “breakthrough” in the 80s or 90s that sadly later ended up being debunked as basically wishful thinking?
Unfortunately it seems like this kind of thing pops up every 5-10 years so I’ve become quite skeptical of it.
Unfortunately it seems like this kind of thing pops up every 5-10 years so I’ve become quite skeptical of it.
Well, here's the paper in nature communications: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28859-8
One might worry that a good enough heuristic (i.e. word completion) will generate sensible sentences even from noise input. However, in this case, he is typing his son's name.
One might worry that a good enough heuristic (i.e. word completion) will generate sensible sentences even from noise input. However, in this case, he is typing his son's name.
Does it say if the researchers knew his family members' names in advance? Wouldn't the "a ha!" moment be when the patient shares something that the researchers couldn't possibly find out on their own and that wouldn't be interpreted via his family's help? None of that appeared to happen here.
Having said that, I've just skimmed the Nature article. But what stands out is that they had 86 days of unsuccessful communication before they changed strategies and then all of a sudden started reporting success. I really hope this works but we should remain skeptical for the possibility of abuse here. Other commenters in this thread have reported that the researchers have committed misconduct in their brain research.
The only thing I fear more than being in the discussed patient's situation is being in their situation and having my thoughts incorrectly interpreted at best or outright manipulated at worst.
Having said that, I've just skimmed the Nature article. But what stands out is that they had 86 days of unsuccessful communication before they changed strategies and then all of a sudden started reporting success. I really hope this works but we should remain skeptical for the possibility of abuse here. Other commenters in this thread have reported that the researchers have committed misconduct in their brain research.
The only thing I fear more than being in the discussed patient's situation is being in their situation and having my thoughts incorrectly interpreted at best or outright manipulated at worst.
Perhaps hire the Randi foundation to design an experiment. This is not "psychic", but they have a lot of experience designing foolproof test for voluntary and involuntary fraud.
For example:
Make one person roll a dice and tell the number to the patient ensuring that nobody else can hear it. Kill the person that roll the dice to ensure the result is secret. Make another person read the BCI and write down the result. Repeat this 18 times and then look at the video and compare the dice and the BCI. It's a success if they guessed correctly at least 9 times. The expected number of correct answers is 3, and the probability to guess 9 randomly is only 0.1%.
If they do this only once, live streaming the experiment it is enough for me, but perhaps it's better to have a lower probability for a random guess. Also, I like that the "success" threshold is one half of the experiments. It's easy to explain, not too much in case it's not perfect, and less than a half is not impressive.
For example:
Make one person roll a dice and tell the number to the patient ensuring that nobody else can hear it. Kill the person that roll the dice to ensure the result is secret. Make another person read the BCI and write down the result. Repeat this 18 times and then look at the video and compare the dice and the BCI. It's a success if they guessed correctly at least 9 times. The expected number of correct answers is 3, and the probability to guess 9 randomly is only 0.1%.
If they do this only once, live streaming the experiment it is enough for me, but perhaps it's better to have a lower probability for a random guess. Also, I like that the "success" threshold is one half of the experiments. It's easy to explain, not too much in case it's not perfect, and less than a half is not impressive.
> Kill the person
This reads like an excuse to kill 18 people...
This reads like an excuse to kill 18 people...
I remember hearing similar things.
The difference here may be that I think in many of the cases I’m thinking about it might not have been locked-in so much as people thought to be in comas or with other serious damage he where the truth is they probably weren’t capable at all.
That doesn’t seem to be the case here. He seems to lack the physical ability to communicate but I’m not sure there is a reason he would lack the mental ability.
The difference here may be that I think in many of the cases I’m thinking about it might not have been locked-in so much as people thought to be in comas or with other serious damage he where the truth is they probably weren’t capable at all.
That doesn’t seem to be the case here. He seems to lack the physical ability to communicate but I’m not sure there is a reason he would lack the mental ability.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2...
The dude who was tortured with 12 years of Barney would like a word with you
The dude who was tortured with 12 years of Barney would like a word with you
Very curious on what is his motivation is to keep on living. There's really no hope for any meaningful improvement in quality of life. Latest research was just so disheartening, as apparently ALS is a prion-like illness.
As of today we barely have a good grasp on treating viral illnesses (and even bacteria is coming to bite us back). I don't foresee any effective treatment for this type of illness in the next few decades.
As of today we barely have a good grasp on treating viral illnesses (and even bacteria is coming to bite us back). I don't foresee any effective treatment for this type of illness in the next few decades.
This is one of the most beautiful pieces of technology I have ever seen. This gives me hope. I can't imagine the feeling of finally being able to communicate after being trapped inside of your own body.
I’d like to know more about the input UX. Does it do any prediction? Is it a variant of T9?
Touch screens are also low fidelity input devices. The lessons learned on streamlining BCI inputs could have wider applications. Like building a web app over dialup.
Touch screens are also low fidelity input devices. The lessons learned on streamlining BCI inputs could have wider applications. Like building a web app over dialup.
There are two videos linked from the "supplementary information" section of the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28859-8#Sec14
In particular, the second video shows sessions where he is spelling out words with the audio-interactive system
In particular, the second video shows sessions where he is spelling out words with the audio-interactive system
Perhaps there is hope for BCI. I always thought the signals was just noise.
We've been able to turn brain signals into words for at least a decade, if not more. The only problem is the skull. It was verified on epilepsy patients (who needed to have their skull open) way back.
Can you cite that one? I'm surprised, I had heard about recognizable linguistic activity (evidently you can see your brain working extra hard when it has to re-interpret a sentence you've already started due to additional context), but nothing like recognizable words.
2010: In an early step toward letting severely paralyzed people speak with their thoughts, researchers translated brain signals into words using two grids of 16 microelectrodes implanted beneath the skull but atop the brain.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100907071249.h...
2014: https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/07/09/172124/a-speech-...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100907071249.h...
2014: https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/07/09/172124/a-speech-...
It’s stories like this that really bring home how much progress we’ve made in medical research.
There were immensely innovative studies in brain research all over the past 50-60 years, but this is still breathtaking.
There were immensely innovative studies in brain research all over the past 50-60 years, but this is still breathtaking.
It really is. I see too often wins like this get overlooked by the general pessimism everyone seems to have about the world.
But through a lot of hard work, we gave someone living in a black mirror-style horror the start of being able to communicate again.
Give it 20 years and I'm sure we'll have a standard box to stick on someone's head to let them communicate reasonably well (or at least enough to order a cold beer).
But through a lot of hard work, we gave someone living in a black mirror-style horror the start of being able to communicate again.
Give it 20 years and I'm sure we'll have a standard box to stick on someone's head to let them communicate reasonably well (or at least enough to order a cold beer).
Well part of the pessimism comes from overstatements of the effects of such research, as evidenced by your comment. There is basically zero evidence that this device provides better quality of life than the systems that already existed. This is essentially a fluff piece, likely financed by the company that made the system. Real breakthroughs are few and far between, and it's been like this for decades.
I'd offer some pushback, from someone with hands-on experience. I'm a paramedic and work alongside other medics, nurses, and physicians who have seen a wave of change in evidence-based medicine over just the course of a few decades. Not everything is flashy and glamorous like a brain-computer interface. No press release that makes it to the top of HN is going to talk about the choice of isotonic crystalloids or sedation agents on intracranial pressure, but we're making great strides, even if by definition "marginal" ones.
Modern resuscitation is like nothing I have ever seen before. Over the past 100 years, we have gained an almost complete understanding of cardiac electrophysiology, acid-base balance, hematology. In the worst-case scenario that you get hit by a car in a major US city, you will likely have TXA forced into your bloodstream through an intravenous catheter within 13 minutes to counteract the body's incorrect hyperfibrinolytic reaction. Your heart rhythm will be constantly analyzed and treated according to ACLS which has essentially been studied and modified to death by the AHA in a gradient descent pattern - we're stuck in a local minimum where the antidysrhythmic of choice alternates between amiodarone and lidocaine. When you arrive at the hospital, a FAST ultrasound scan will be performed where the culmination of materials science and informatics comes together to quickly identify blood in the retroperitoneal space without incurring the logistics of getting a trauma patient into a CT scanner. All this while a neurologist checks 12 of your cranial nerves and someone checks the tone of your rectal sphincter - because evidence shows us this is an important sign. In the case that you have an intracranial bleed, you'll be followed with MRI (which I'm convinced is the closest we've gotten to Star Trek scanner technology) to identify the penumbra of a stroke based on the deoxygenation of hemoglobin. We can now scan a variety of elements with magnetic resonance spectroscopy besides just precessing hydrogen atoms, which is helpful in identifying neoplastic lesions without the daunting task of a brain biopsy.
Not everything is gloom-and-doom at the financing of some big company.
Modern resuscitation is like nothing I have ever seen before. Over the past 100 years, we have gained an almost complete understanding of cardiac electrophysiology, acid-base balance, hematology. In the worst-case scenario that you get hit by a car in a major US city, you will likely have TXA forced into your bloodstream through an intravenous catheter within 13 minutes to counteract the body's incorrect hyperfibrinolytic reaction. Your heart rhythm will be constantly analyzed and treated according to ACLS which has essentially been studied and modified to death by the AHA in a gradient descent pattern - we're stuck in a local minimum where the antidysrhythmic of choice alternates between amiodarone and lidocaine. When you arrive at the hospital, a FAST ultrasound scan will be performed where the culmination of materials science and informatics comes together to quickly identify blood in the retroperitoneal space without incurring the logistics of getting a trauma patient into a CT scanner. All this while a neurologist checks 12 of your cranial nerves and someone checks the tone of your rectal sphincter - because evidence shows us this is an important sign. In the case that you have an intracranial bleed, you'll be followed with MRI (which I'm convinced is the closest we've gotten to Star Trek scanner technology) to identify the penumbra of a stroke based on the deoxygenation of hemoglobin. We can now scan a variety of elements with magnetic resonance spectroscopy besides just precessing hydrogen atoms, which is helpful in identifying neoplastic lesions without the daunting task of a brain biopsy.
Not everything is gloom-and-doom at the financing of some big company.
Interesting to see a paramedic on HN. I thought we were all desk jockeys here :)
Thanks for your service to others.
That contains so much jargon that it has to be 100% legit. The rectal sphincter tone though.
I can try to break it down for an uninitiated audience.
"isotonic crystalloids" - Solutions such as normal saline used to restore volume proportionally to the bloodstream and intracellular spaces (as opposed to hypotonic or hypertonic, isotonic solutions just match the normal blood's osmolality)
"sedation agents" - The patient is out, you keep 'em out, ideally without tanking their blood pressure. Different than paralysis.
"electrophysiology" - Electrical conduction through the heart.
"acid-base balance" - Various chemical processes and enzymes in the body only work well within a certain pH range, and long-term, only a narrow pH range is compatible with life.
"hematology" - Blood and its components, including the cascade of enzymes and clotting factors involved in coagulation.
"TXA" - Tranexamic acid - An anti-anti-clotting agent, which stops the body from breaking down blood clots. In the context of trauma, it allows your body to form the needed clots to avoid imminent exsanguination.
"ACLS" - Advanced Cardiac Life Support - The AHA algorithm for identifying and treating life-threatening heart rhythms that most paramedics, RTs, nurses, etc. and above are trained on. In practice, this means that an unresponsive patient or code situation can be run to a certain standard with the staff who are immediately summoned in any clinical area of any hospital within about 30 seconds.
"antidysrhythmic" - In the ACLS algorithms, it's a drug (usually a potassium channel blocker or sodium channel blocker or both) that acts on the cardiac action potential to do something that tends to make lethal dysrhythmias stop and return to a normal sinus rhythm. How exactly, you'd need to ask a cardiologist or specialized pharmacist.
"FAST [ultrasound] scan" - Focused assessment with sonography for trauma - it's just an ultrasound of the flank area to detect blood around the kidneys ("retroperitoneal space") which has a high mortality rate and usually requires emergency surgery.
"cranial nerves" - Your brain can communicate with the rest of your body either through your spinal cord, or through the cranial nerves which are direct interfaces for things like smell, sight, tongue movement, etc. Checking these is an important part of determining of a brain injury or spinal cord injury is present.
"rectal sphincter tone" - If it's present, then it's unlikely that spinal cord injury above a certain level has occurred.
"intracranial bleed" - It's bleeding, in your brain.
"magnetic resonance spectroscopy" - The original MRI technique was based on spinning all the hydrogen atoms in your body such that they aligned head to toe, then detecting electromagnetic induction in a coil as they were jarred back and forth at a megahertz frequency. Nowadays, we can do this with other atoms like phosphorus in the same way.
"precessing" - The pattern of relaxation of an atom similar to a spinning top where it goes from the aforementioned align orientation (forced by a strong magnet to align head to toe), and gradually relaxes to its random orientation while spinning at the Larmor frequency (megahertz frequency of the corresponding type of atom).
"penumbra" - The border between healthy living brain tissue and dead brain tissue at the outside territory of a brain injury post-stroke.
"neoplastic" - Uncontrolled cell growth, similar to cancer except not all neoplasms are cancer, some are benign tumors which will never be able to metastasize/spread to other parts of the body.
"isotonic crystalloids" - Solutions such as normal saline used to restore volume proportionally to the bloodstream and intracellular spaces (as opposed to hypotonic or hypertonic, isotonic solutions just match the normal blood's osmolality)
"sedation agents" - The patient is out, you keep 'em out, ideally without tanking their blood pressure. Different than paralysis.
"electrophysiology" - Electrical conduction through the heart.
"acid-base balance" - Various chemical processes and enzymes in the body only work well within a certain pH range, and long-term, only a narrow pH range is compatible with life.
"hematology" - Blood and its components, including the cascade of enzymes and clotting factors involved in coagulation.
"TXA" - Tranexamic acid - An anti-anti-clotting agent, which stops the body from breaking down blood clots. In the context of trauma, it allows your body to form the needed clots to avoid imminent exsanguination.
"ACLS" - Advanced Cardiac Life Support - The AHA algorithm for identifying and treating life-threatening heart rhythms that most paramedics, RTs, nurses, etc. and above are trained on. In practice, this means that an unresponsive patient or code situation can be run to a certain standard with the staff who are immediately summoned in any clinical area of any hospital within about 30 seconds.
"antidysrhythmic" - In the ACLS algorithms, it's a drug (usually a potassium channel blocker or sodium channel blocker or both) that acts on the cardiac action potential to do something that tends to make lethal dysrhythmias stop and return to a normal sinus rhythm. How exactly, you'd need to ask a cardiologist or specialized pharmacist.
"FAST [ultrasound] scan" - Focused assessment with sonography for trauma - it's just an ultrasound of the flank area to detect blood around the kidneys ("retroperitoneal space") which has a high mortality rate and usually requires emergency surgery.
"cranial nerves" - Your brain can communicate with the rest of your body either through your spinal cord, or through the cranial nerves which are direct interfaces for things like smell, sight, tongue movement, etc. Checking these is an important part of determining of a brain injury or spinal cord injury is present.
"rectal sphincter tone" - If it's present, then it's unlikely that spinal cord injury above a certain level has occurred.
"intracranial bleed" - It's bleeding, in your brain.
"magnetic resonance spectroscopy" - The original MRI technique was based on spinning all the hydrogen atoms in your body such that they aligned head to toe, then detecting electromagnetic induction in a coil as they were jarred back and forth at a megahertz frequency. Nowadays, we can do this with other atoms like phosphorus in the same way.
"precessing" - The pattern of relaxation of an atom similar to a spinning top where it goes from the aforementioned align orientation (forced by a strong magnet to align head to toe), and gradually relaxes to its random orientation while spinning at the Larmor frequency (megahertz frequency of the corresponding type of atom).
"penumbra" - The border between healthy living brain tissue and dead brain tissue at the outside territory of a brain injury post-stroke.
"neoplastic" - Uncontrolled cell growth, similar to cancer except not all neoplasms are cancer, some are benign tumors which will never be able to metastasize/spread to other parts of the body.
So helpful, thanks for the layman translation!
Wow sure you don’t want to be a doctor? You sound super adept in speaking medicine
> There is basically zero evidence that this device provides better quality of life than the systems that already existed.
IMO it is less about which purpose this specific device is used for, and more about what this breakthrough has the potential to enable us to do in the future, using this tech as the basis to build on top of (assuming it is proven a success and all the kinks are worked out).
If there was a standardized "smart hat" that I could put on my head that would allow me to control my AR glasses in an efficient way, that would be crazy. Because right now, that's one specific concern regarding AR usability, since current solutions with buttons and touch surfaces and voice controls and making hand gestures are awkwardly inconvenient and feel clunky.
UI/UX paradigm for certain consumer device categories completely shifts. A lot of accessibility problems get resolved. Hardware itself on a lot of consumer devices can become much simpler and more robust, since there is no need for much hand-driven interaction.
And that's just a singular the most obvious example I could've thought of. There are plenty of potential amazing things that could be enabled by this tech, even if the specific use case for it that was presented in the article might not "provide better quality of life".
IMO it is less about which purpose this specific device is used for, and more about what this breakthrough has the potential to enable us to do in the future, using this tech as the basis to build on top of (assuming it is proven a success and all the kinks are worked out).
If there was a standardized "smart hat" that I could put on my head that would allow me to control my AR glasses in an efficient way, that would be crazy. Because right now, that's one specific concern regarding AR usability, since current solutions with buttons and touch surfaces and voice controls and making hand gestures are awkwardly inconvenient and feel clunky.
UI/UX paradigm for certain consumer device categories completely shifts. A lot of accessibility problems get resolved. Hardware itself on a lot of consumer devices can become much simpler and more robust, since there is no need for much hand-driven interaction.
And that's just a singular the most obvious example I could've thought of. There are plenty of potential amazing things that could be enabled by this tech, even if the specific use case for it that was presented in the article might not "provide better quality of life".
Not much. This probably only marginally improves a patient's quality of life beyond what we were already capable of providing with existing systems. It's better than nothing of course, since you made a general point about medical research, the life expectancy of the average American has only gone up 5 years over the past 40 years (excluding declines due to COVID).
I would strongly disagree.
The decreasing life expectancy in the US is probably, ahem, largely attributed to a medical system that is not particularly well-optimized for boosting mass life expectancy (despite being world-class in absolute quality of care, I assume).
If you look closely, past decades have brought immense breakthroughs such as
- the first completely synthetic new antibiotic
- dramatic improvements in spatial and temporal resolution of imaging systems (MRI, PET etc.)
- actually useful robotic assistance for surgery
- easy, simple, and widespread techniques that are nevertheless life-saving, including a broad awareness for important events such as cardiac arrest and stroke
- much better, faster and more accurate laboratory work, down to the DNA level
And that's only a fraction of it which a layman such as myself can come up with from the top of my head!
The decreasing life expectancy in the US is probably, ahem, largely attributed to a medical system that is not particularly well-optimized for boosting mass life expectancy (despite being world-class in absolute quality of care, I assume).
If you look closely, past decades have brought immense breakthroughs such as
- the first completely synthetic new antibiotic
- dramatic improvements in spatial and temporal resolution of imaging systems (MRI, PET etc.)
- actually useful robotic assistance for surgery
- easy, simple, and widespread techniques that are nevertheless life-saving, including a broad awareness for important events such as cardiac arrest and stroke
- much better, faster and more accurate laboratory work, down to the DNA level
And that's only a fraction of it which a layman such as myself can come up with from the top of my head!
Unless those things help people live longer or better (with scientific evidence to show such an effect) they are interesting developments with no actual impact on patients. Do people treated with surgical robots live longer or better? Has the synthetic antibiotic helped average patients live longer or better? So far, we only see very marginal improvements, and at massive, constantly increasing costs.
I'm struggling to understand what you mean. Finally being able to communicate strikes you as "only marginally" improved? You really don't think that being able to talk to family, say that you're in pain, ask for an audiobook, helps much at all?
And then you mention life expectancy, which is quantity of life.
And then you mention life expectancy, which is quantity of life.
There are other systems that provide this ability. This system is not the first and is not the only thing that allows one with this condition to communicate. This is mostly a fluff piece. Quantity and quality both matter.
Who says this isn’t the beginning of a revolution of not being tethered to our meat bag bodies?
This is sort of thing we should focus on.
At some point in each of our lives, we'll be dependent on the empathy of another to keep us alive and comfortable. Designing and discovering technology now will help us all then, and help others that are suffering right now.
If you have to laboriously spell each word letter by letter, German is a very unfortunate language to use.
Not a specialist, but the complex grammar of German tends to carry more information than English, which draws on a much larger vocabulary but flattened a formerly complex grammar into more words to say the same.
Linguists refer to these traits you're describing by classifying languages as being more or less "synthetic" or "analytic."[1] Broadly speaking, synthetic languages tend to encode information by modifying words (e.g. the articles "der" vs "dem" in German); analytic languages tend to encode information via adding words and word order (e.g. "the" versus "to the" in English.)
Real languages exist somewhere on a spectrum. Languages in the Indo-European family show an empirical historical tendency to become less synthetic and more analytic over time and via contact with other languages. German is more synthetic than English, but less synthetic than Russian, and much less synthetic than very old IE languages such as Vedic Sanskrit. English is more analytic than German, but less analytic and more synthetic than Afrikaans. Some non-IE languages such as Finnish are extremely synthetic.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language
Real languages exist somewhere on a spectrum. Languages in the Indo-European family show an empirical historical tendency to become less synthetic and more analytic over time and via contact with other languages. German is more synthetic than English, but less synthetic than Russian, and much less synthetic than very old IE languages such as Vedic Sanskrit. English is more analytic than German, but less analytic and more synthetic than Afrikaans. Some non-IE languages such as Finnish are extremely synthetic.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_language , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language
Excellent, that's precisely the pointer I was looking for. Thanks!
Your comment and the linked Wikipedia pages has challenged my understanding of my native language, Afrikaans.
Based on the description I would classify Afrikaans as synthetic, not analytic.
Afrikaans has an origin as a pidgin Dutch spoken by slaves and other lower classes. Afrikaans speakers can communicate effortlessly with Dutch and Flemish speakers for example. Our grammar is decidedly germanic and we make use of morphemes in stead of separate words.
Held: hero Heldjie: diminutive hero Helde: plural
Heldin: female hero Heldinnetjie: diminutive female hero Heldinne: plural
Although it should be noted that explicit female versions of nouns is falling out of favour to some degree.
Based on the description I would classify Afrikaans as synthetic, not analytic.
Afrikaans has an origin as a pidgin Dutch spoken by slaves and other lower classes. Afrikaans speakers can communicate effortlessly with Dutch and Flemish speakers for example. Our grammar is decidedly germanic and we make use of morphemes in stead of separate words.
Held: hero Heldjie: diminutive hero Helde: plural
Heldin: female hero Heldinnetjie: diminutive female hero Heldinne: plural
Although it should be noted that explicit female versions of nouns is falling out of favour to some degree.
According to what I've read (which could very well not be representative of the language as it's spoken by your community), grammatical gender (which Dutch still has) is largely dead in Afrikaans. There is no case system present in Afrikaans. Much like in English, you wouldn't modify the article of the word because that word is part of some innate class ("gender") of nouns. Die held, die heldin, die helde, etc. In German, you would have der Held (hero), die Heldin (heroine), die Helden (heroes)/die Heldinnen (heroines), and those articles would change depending on the noun's role in the sentence (ie "der Held" -> "dem Helden", if the hero is the one receiving something in a sentence).
English and Afrikaans still have remnants of grammatical gender and case, but it's not really enough to be considered a prominent feature of the language.
English and Afrikaans still have remnants of grammatical gender and case, but it's not really enough to be considered a prominent feature of the language.
It's a question of relative positioning along spectrum, not a binary state. Real languages are not "synthetic" or "analytic" in an absolute sense. They are "more synthetic than this other language" or "more analytic than this other language."
Does this mean that languages become more synthetic if they're left on their own? Did Latin and Sanskrit develop in greater isolation? This is a fascinating subject.
The general categorical answer to that question is not known. Some linguists think it might be so, others disagree.
Within the Indo-European family that includes Latin and Sanskrit, the empirical historical process seems to have been that the Proto-Indo-European language was highly synthetic, and as time went on, less synthetic daughter languages such as Latin and Sanskrit developed from it by degrees. These in turn gradually developed by degrees into even less synthetic / more analytic daughter languages (Italian, Hindi, etc.)
Why this happened is an open theoretical question. Pidginization (which would roughly correspond to 'lack of isolation'), and/or phonetic changes that impacted discernment of synthetic features are leading candidates.
Within the Indo-European family that includes Latin and Sanskrit, the empirical historical process seems to have been that the Proto-Indo-European language was highly synthetic, and as time went on, less synthetic daughter languages such as Latin and Sanskrit developed from it by degrees. These in turn gradually developed by degrees into even less synthetic / more analytic daughter languages (Italian, Hindi, etc.)
Why this happened is an open theoretical question. Pidginization (which would roughly correspond to 'lack of isolation'), and/or phonetic changes that impacted discernment of synthetic features are leading candidates.
How does Mandarin compare on that scale
It's a stereotypically analytic language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language
>>For example, Mandarin Chinese has many compound words, giving it a moderately high ratio of morphemes per word, but since it has almost no inflectional affixes at all to convey grammatical relationships, it is a very analytic language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_language
>>For example, Mandarin Chinese has many compound words, giving it a moderately high ratio of morphemes per word, but since it has almost no inflectional affixes at all to convey grammatical relationships, it is a very analytic language.
I asked one of my comp ling profs, who cut their teeth at Bell Labs, about this question.
She said that, as spoken, information density is fairly similar from language to language. Languages that express the same information using more phonemes tend to be spoken using more phonemes per unit of time, and it what (in some circumstances though not all) can contribute to the perception that people speaking in one language speak much faster.
I suppose that might not help much when the issue is writing though, or any circumstance where phonemic production is at a fixed rate regardless of language.
She said that, as spoken, information density is fairly similar from language to language. Languages that express the same information using more phonemes tend to be spoken using more phonemes per unit of time, and it what (in some circumstances though not all) can contribute to the perception that people speaking in one language speak much faster.
I suppose that might not help much when the issue is writing though, or any circumstance where phonemic production is at a fixed rate regardless of language.
I think it was 39 bits per second of information. Regardless of language.
Languages with denser information are spoken slower. Vice versa.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594
Languages with denser information are spoken slower. Vice versa.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594
Thanks for the reference to back up my recollection of a lecture, nice to know my memory (and professor) are correct. It was (and is) fascinating to me that there are these sorts of constants.
I find French full of nuance (=bits of information) and habitually spoken very fast.
That's perhaps true, but not necessarily relevant to word length. Much of the added information in German relative to English is encapsulated in articles, which are around 3-5 letters, which I suspect is not the most significant factor for German word length.
As an aside, German also relies heavily on modal verbs (nearly as much as English does), far more than even related languages such as Spanish. There are many distant or unrelated languages with more informative verb conjugations/inflections.
As an aside, German also relies heavily on modal verbs (nearly as much as English does), far more than even related languages such as Spanish. There are many distant or unrelated languages with more informative verb conjugations/inflections.
That's generous. I see differences, I don't see more/less or any tendencies between German and English. I see some areas where inefficiencies are introduced in German, I see some areas where more information information is conveyed. Somewhat curious about this topic of more data per second, by language, so anything that reduces the anecdotes in favor of a study would be welcome!
Yeah, I'd be interested in a proper study of this. There are tons of papers on speech information density, which is not the same as character information density.
One thing that provides a lot of contextual information in German are the inflections and suffixes, i.e.
"Köchin" - female cook
"Koch" - male cook
"Köchchen" / "Köchle" ... - diminuitive cook
"Kochs" - possessive / "the cook's ..."
etc.
One thing that provides a lot of contextual information in German are the inflections and suffixes, i.e.
"Köchin" - female cook
"Koch" - male cook
"Köchchen" / "Köchle" ... - diminuitive cook
"Kochs" - possessive / "the cook's ..."
etc.
German is famous for its compound nouns. My feeling is compound nouns are noticed by English speakers due to their explicit verbosity, but I don't have any data to back that up.
It's ironic because English is just as compound friendly. Take a German compound like Sprachwissenschaft ("language-science", i.e. linguistics). Now consider an English compound like "Earth science". The only difference is that it is convention in English to put a space between the words in a compound, whereas in German they are written without spaces. Things only seem different because of the impressive length some single "words" can reach in German, but English is just as capable of crazy compounds. Take this example that was discussed in a linguistics paper: "gay clergy book row priest", i.e. the priest who was involved in a controversy about a book about gay clergy. Quite convoluted, but we're not as awed by it, just because it happens to be spelled with spaces in between each part.
I think you're missing why people find German compound nouns interesting and notable. Does English have compound nouns and noun phrases? Certainly. But take your example: "gay clergy book row priest." The noun phrase literally represents the sum of its parts, i.e. a priest involved in a row over a gay clergy book. The phrase is complicated, but its meaning is straightforward. In German, however, it seems as if two unrelated nouns come together to form something unexpected. For instance the word for tortoise is "Schildkröte", translated literally as "shield toad." Is a tortoise a toad? Most native English speakers would say no. Does it have a shield? Again, most native English speakers would say no. So you have a case where there are two easily understood German words that come together to form something unexpected (to an English speaker). Perhaps a German would say that yes, a tortoise is a toad and yes, it has a shield. This is probably my own bias, but I don't think compound nouns in English form nouns in the same way as some German compound nouns do, or at least it feels to happen more often in German than in English.
Again, I don't think German is exceptional in this regard: we have English "catbird" (so called for its call), "bush baby" (for a small primate which is not a baby), "lady finger" (a regional name for okra), "buttercup" (a kind of flower), "kangaroo paw" (a kind of flower), etc.
I'd be pretty shocked if a German speaker thought a tortoise had a Schild or really was a Kroete, in the same way I'd be shocked if an English speaker said that a bush baby was an actual baby. Non-compositional noun compounds occur in both languages.
I'd be pretty shocked if a German speaker thought a tortoise had a Schild or really was a Kroete, in the same way I'd be shocked if an English speaker said that a bush baby was an actual baby. Non-compositional noun compounds occur in both languages.
And English also features compound nouns, for example "compound noun". Usually (but not always) a space is within the word, so it's not that obvious. This language feature is a little less popular in english, but works very similar.
It's just like any other language, except without spaces. Czech language can do exactly the same, but we usually use the space - looks nicer.
For example, the longest Czech word: Nejnezdevětadevadesáteroznásobovávatelnějšími = [do something] by those most not multipliable by 99.
For example, the longest Czech word: Nejnezdevětadevadesáteroznásobovávatelnějšími = [do something] by those most not multipliable by 99.
My impression when studying German is that the German language has more compound words that are singular words in English. e.g. Armbanduhr (watch), Aussehen (appearance), Hauptstadt (capital), Staubsauger (vacuum), anything ending with Zeug, etc. That doesn't necessarily mean German is longer on average.
An Armbanduhr is a wrist watch, not just a watch. I'm sure the Germans often shorten to it 'uhr', just like the English do.
Capital is short for capital city.
Vacuum is also short for vacuum cleaner.
I'll grant you Aussehen - that's a single word in english. But longer than the German one.
Capital is short for capital city.
Vacuum is also short for vacuum cleaner.
I'll grant you Aussehen - that's a single word in english. But longer than the German one.
Yes, you can make the English words longer if you wish. But it’s very common to shorten them.
Something like this is likely to turn into something more akin to Stephen Hawking's communication device over time, where words and whole phrases can be selected as easily as letters. Hawking's device was pretty primitive, too. A few iterations on a device like this--combined with a patient willing to put in what I imagine is an excruciating level of effort--could probably learn to communicate in near-real-time. Assuming this isn't just another misrepresentation. I fully expect someone will solve the problem even if it's not these guys.
Also the fact that the verb often stands at the end of the sentence (Verbklammer), which means that you need to wait quite a bit until you can be sure what happened.
Persian wants to have a word with you:)
The position of the verb in that language is fixed so it needs to *always* stand at the end of the sentence.
I remember translating news articles from BBC Persian and having to read five lines of text before reaching the verb. I love suspense.
The position of the verb in that language is fixed so it needs to *always* stand at the end of the sentence.
I remember translating news articles from BBC Persian and having to read five lines of text before reaching the verb. I love suspense.
Could be worse, could be Russian!
Either way, you could take shortcuts like leaving out vowels (works pretty well in most languages and is even the default in some, e.g. in Arabic).
Either way, you could take shortcuts like leaving out vowels (works pretty well in most languages and is even the default in some, e.g. in Arabic).
He has a lot of time!
Imagine how many people were euthanized while locked in without their consent before this technology existed. Scary and I hope this technology is funded.
In another life I would love to be a BCI researcher.
In another life I’d just try and do it.
Does anyone know the speed/ rate at which the German patient would communicate words or sentences?
"On average, 121 min were spent spelling and the average length of these communications was 131 characters per day. The patient’s intelligible messages comprised 5747 characters produced over 5338 min, corresponding to an average rate of 1.08 characters per minute."
I wonder if this is caused by the mans mental state or the technical limitations.
If you watch about 20 seconds of the linked video, it shows the system as a screenshot and in practice for a few seconds. [0]
I would postulate that the loop starts by selecting the yellow block and waiting for him to select or reject it. If he selects it, he is able to cycle through the letters from left to right, ending at the symbol all the way to the right on every layer to exit that block. Then it keeps cycling down until he selects a new colored block. You can see this in practice if you rewatch the bit where he asks his son if he wants to watch a movie with him.
The article also notes that the man gave feedback to improve the system, so I would guess that it's a mix between a limitation of the way this system is set up, how fast the system can accurately distinguish a yes from a no, and how fast he is able to keep up, and for how long.
It would be interesting to see this system be implemented in a better way, I'm sure you could speed this up by dynamically changing the letter layout or even suggesting words on the fly, in the same way spelling suggestions work on other devices.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et22mZ_Ovo0&t=199s
I would postulate that the loop starts by selecting the yellow block and waiting for him to select or reject it. If he selects it, he is able to cycle through the letters from left to right, ending at the symbol all the way to the right on every layer to exit that block. Then it keeps cycling down until he selects a new colored block. You can see this in practice if you rewatch the bit where he asks his son if he wants to watch a movie with him.
The article also notes that the man gave feedback to improve the system, so I would guess that it's a mix between a limitation of the way this system is set up, how fast the system can accurately distinguish a yes from a no, and how fast he is able to keep up, and for how long.
It would be interesting to see this system be implemented in a better way, I'm sure you could speed this up by dynamically changing the letter layout or even suggesting words on the fly, in the same way spelling suggestions work on other devices.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et22mZ_Ovo0&t=199s
The second video accompanying the actual paper should give a good sense. It's not the fastest but it's still incredible: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28859-8#Sec14
Isn't it sad that he has to type out his only messages to the world letter by letter, and he spends his time typing out the names of mega-brands?
"...‘(son’s name) moechtest du mit mir disneys die hexe und der zauberer anschauen auf amazon’ – ‘would you like to watch Disney’s witch and wizard with me on amazon’ on day 461"
"...‘(son’s name) moechtest du mit mir disneys die hexe und der zauberer anschauen auf amazon’ – ‘would you like to watch Disney’s witch and wizard with me on amazon’ on day 461"
He's talking to his kid. Joe Average isn't going to tell his son that he has plans to use the BCI to transcend this mortal coil and claim the power of God. He's going to do what this guy did -- ask for a beer, to hear some of his favorite music again, and to enjoy something simple with his kid that doesn't require a lot of physical input or talking from him.
Researchers should also offer patients the choice to die.
[deleted]
I always flip between space travel and medical science as being our greatest achievement. For me, the covid vaccines and this story give medical science the lead.
Article doesn't answer the important question: did he get his beer?
I assume he is supplied with nutrients via a tube and cannot swallow, so probably not. And even if, he would not get to taste it :(
The article mentions requesting different foods. If he couldn’t taste then that would be a waste of effort. Why waste the time to ask for something you can’t experience?
>I assume he is supplied with nutrients via a tube and cannot swallow, so probably not
You can definitely still experience alcohol. There was a GQ article about Richard Norris, recipient of a face transplant, who went to the store and got himself some Wild Turkey which he ingested via a tube to his stomach.
> He reaches into the brown bag, pulls out a bottle of Wild Turkey. [...] "For my throat," he says. He can’t take over-the-counter medications, he says. Too risky with his meds. There’s a backpack at his feet. He opens it, pulls out some tubing and a wide syringe, about a half-inch across, the kind you use to give medicine to horses. [...] He hooks the syringe to the tubing, lifts up his shirt. [...] He opens the Wild Turkey and starts pouring.
https://www.gq.com/story/richard-norris
You can definitely still experience alcohol. There was a GQ article about Richard Norris, recipient of a face transplant, who went to the store and got himself some Wild Turkey which he ingested via a tube to his stomach.
> He reaches into the brown bag, pulls out a bottle of Wild Turkey. [...] "For my throat," he says. He can’t take over-the-counter medications, he says. Too risky with his meds. There’s a backpack at his feet. He opens it, pulls out some tubing and a wide syringe, about a half-inch across, the kind you use to give medicine to horses. [...] He hooks the syringe to the tubing, lifts up his shirt. [...] He opens the Wild Turkey and starts pouring.
https://www.gq.com/story/richard-norris
Maybe he just misses the mild buzz from the alcohol.
They could at least put some drops on his tongue
I was thinking the same, a few ice cold beer drops, and they could ask him if he can taste it.
Edit: seems his requests could have been conceded through his feeding tube:
"The first message was a simple thanks to Birbaumer and the rest of the team. Other messages related to the man's care preferences: asking for a head massage or for more gel on his eye (which was prone to dryness) and requesting a higher head position when visitors were present. He even made suggestions for improving the performance of the spelling system.
Eventually, he could make specific dietary requests for his feeding tube: soup with meat, sweet pea soup, and curry with potato. And he did request a beer and for his caretakers to play his favorite band, Tool, very loud."
Unfortunately he's locked-in because of progressive muscle atrophy, so recovery isn't likely.
Edit: seems his requests could have been conceded through his feeding tube:
"The first message was a simple thanks to Birbaumer and the rest of the team. Other messages related to the man's care preferences: asking for a head massage or for more gel on his eye (which was prone to dryness) and requesting a higher head position when visitors were present. He even made suggestions for improving the performance of the spelling system.
Eventually, he could make specific dietary requests for his feeding tube: soup with meat, sweet pea soup, and curry with potato. And he did request a beer and for his caretakers to play his favorite band, Tool, very loud."
Unfortunately he's locked-in because of progressive muscle atrophy, so recovery isn't likely.
[deleted]
hmm...what if you accidently divulge your crypto seed phrase
Ah yes I'd much rather remain locked-in than divulge my precious seed phrase /s
It's the only counter to rubber hose decryption!
How? It would take forever to type out and most people don't even have it memorized.
caca3(1)
My grandmother would cry (tears would flow) when some family members came by and spoke about her condition in front of her. My mother would jerk her hand away from my father's when he was too fidgety with her. It would appear that they were both experiencing some form of consciousness, just trapped and likely very scared. So I took care of the swatting away of others and spoke softly to them to let them know they weren't alone.
I wish they could have expressed their needs in that moment.