Cognitive Prosthethics

Maxime Derian

• Publisher: ISTE Press - Elsevier
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781785482953
• eBook ISBN: 9780081027578
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Biotechnology
• Index: Biological Sciences

Computerized machines can be found in many forms and all around us – in our pockets, and even sometimes in our body. For many of us, they are now essential elements of everyday life. When it comes to smartphones, connected objects, medical digital devices and e-health, these digital tools have proliferated in our environment, continually transforming our modes of social organization. They act as prostheses and orthotics that "enhance our cognitive capacities and influence our inherent behaviors. Are digital tools that perpetually envelop the body and the spirit able to overwhelm the social order? Could our cognitive prosthetics lead to permanent, radical change to our society, which could become similar to a hive? This book explores this reflection, which is at the center of social research on digital tools. - Presents a complete review of the field of computerized human prosthetics - Drawn from research conducted over 6 years and from 2 post doctoral surveys conducted at renowned institutions in France and Japan (Sorbonne University, CNRS, Tokyo Institute of technology) - Provides an interdisciplinary approach, combining anthropology, sociology, psychology and philosophy

1

Typology of Prostheses and Interface Modes between Humans and Digital Systems

Abstract

Not all digitized systems are necessarily prostheses or orthoses for the human body.

Keywords

Augmentation; Bionic prostheses; Cognition; Cognitive prostheses; Digital systems; Myoelectric; Orthoses; Typology

Not all digitized systems are necessarily prostheses or orthoses ¹ for the human body.

For the interaction between a tool and a human being to be of a prosthetic or orthotic nature, some kind of physical or psychological hybridization needs to be put in place between Metal and the Flesh. “Human–Machine” interfaces (HMIs) are the precise physical locations where Metal and the Flesh join forces. This site of exchange and hybridization can be either within the body, on the skin or outside the body.

Endoprostheses have implanted interfaces. With this type of device, the interaction between Metal and the Flesh is very often not of a consistent kind. In a way, the HMI can be considered as “homeostatic”.

The HMI of robotic bionic limbs is sometimes implanted, but most of the time it is external to the body. Currently, the most widespread technological trend involves electromyographical detection (EMG), also known as “myoelectric”.

In 2008, the time I spent at the Koike Lab taught me that myoelectric interfaces were sufficiently satisfactory in terms of data acquisition and reliability in order to make robotic systems work. The considerable advantage of EMG sensors is that they do not need to be implanted. The other solution, also effective in direct control of a robotic system by thoughts, is the BCI (Brain–Computer Interface) system, which involves very high iatrogenic risks since it requires, in order to be optimal, implantation of electrodes directly into the brain. Until now, experiments have required trepanation of the skull of the patient in order to install the electronic connection socket, which implies enormous risks in terms of infection and greatly reduces the life expectancy of the user. The Neuralink project, which began in March 2017, proposes to try to place a “stentprobe” in the brain by taking the electronic interface through the jugular vein, then deploying it in the brain in a manner that is probably irreversible, a little like an umbrella. This allows the size of the orifice essential for installation of the necessary connector to be slightly reduced.

“Cognitive” prostheses (in other words, devices that supplement our personal memory, communication and calculation capacities, such as mobile phones, laptop computers, tablets and smartglasses) systematically have, until now, external interfaces.

Cochlear implants have an obvious direct cognitive impact, but, since they aim to restore hearing without adding additional information, I believe it is pertinent to assimilate them instead to endoprostheses. Effectively, their HMI is also globally homeostatic.

A minimum ergonomic level is always required for us to be in a position to interact with our external digitized tools.

Forms of interaction between humans and digital tools that are not implanted but “embedded” arise from history of use and technological innovation. The story involves ergonomy and choices made by the industrial sector. Ergonomy includes “all that is related to human effort ² with the understanding being that the notion of effort is applied in the widest sense of human activity” [GAI 97].

Mobile phones, which are currently amongst the most widespread detachable digital prostheses, in a certain way extend our senses of hearing and sight as well as our capacity to communicate.

If the mobile phone is considered to be a prosthesis, it is legitimate to ask the question of exactly which organ it is replacing. Ernst Kapp, at the end of the 19th Century, told us that:

“In the internal organization of the body, ‘organs’ denote the physical structures that deal with nutrition and maintenance, but also the senses, these thresholds across which perception of what is happening transfers from the outside to the inside, as well as the external organization of the body, the body extremities.” [KAP 07]

Smartphones are prostheses for perception, recall and cognition. They are attempts to “augment” the human brain. A cognitive prosthesis is a sort of detachable new organ.

For a large number of people, a personal computer is the storage medium for a significant amount of important data, household bills and other irreplaceable data (photographs, video recordings) or professional work (CAD, artists’ works, university publications, etc.). Mobile phones contain the phone numbers of close friends and family, a call register, a number of sent and received text messages, family photos, audio and video recordings and so on. The telephone directory is a critical databank for an individual. With respect to pre-existing tools (libraries, address books, video tapes, storage boxes, GPS, movie cameras, image cameras, hi-fi systems, barcode readers, etc.), tools such as smartphones have the defining characteristic of bringing together all these functions, and many more, into a small volume, which can be easily carried on the person.

1.1 Interfacing humans and machines

Prosthetic digital technology clearly subscribes to the paradigmatic framework of “ubiquitous information technology”. RFID tags, smartphones and future augmented reality glasses are the contemporary expression of this technological trend, which was conceptualized in the 1990s:

“The arcane aura that surrounds personal computers is not just a ‘user interface’ problem. My colleagues and I at [Xerox] PARC think that the idea of a ‘personal’ computer itself is misplaced, and that the vision of laptop machines, dynabooks and ‘knowledge navigators’ is only a transitional step towards achieving the real potential of information technology. Such machines cannot truly make computing an integral, visible part of the way people live their lives. Therefore, we are trying to conceive a new way of thinking about computers in the world, one that takes into account the natural human environment and allows the computers themselves to vanish into the background.” [WEI 91]

The key to “ubiquitous” or “pervasive” ³ information technology lies in the effort to miniaturize and increase electrical autonomy. It is precisely these technological improvements that enable the prosthesis to become portable.

Since the initial Xerox Dynabook ⁴ was the size of a washing machine in the 1970s, its use was restricted in a manner comparable to a desktop PC. Having become easily portable, digital tools can potentially be used 24/7. Touch-sensitive and portable objects such as iPads constitute popularization, 40 years later, of the underlying concept of Dynabook.

It seems that the current rise in information technology, of a ubiquitous nature, has the consequence of modifying our relationship with the world and with others.

But clearly, it is not innovations related to homeostatic and implanted HMIs and endoprostheses that are in the process of overthrowing our society. It is much more the pervasive presence of HMIs created by detachable digitized machines that are in the process of modifying our social world:

“The increase in the number of researchers working on ubiquitous information technology is going to allow the most discouraging technological challenges to be overcome. This leaves only challenges of a psychological, social and commercial dimension. The most disruptive revolutions are not those proclaimed by pundits, but those that surreptitiously insinuate themselves in areas where they are least expected. Time will tell if ubiquitous information technology, or something else, will be the next thing to quietly transform our lives.” [WEI 93]

Mark Weiser is the founding father of the ubiquitous information technology concept. He died in 1999, a decade before his prediction came true. Indeed, the current widespread existence of information technology tools seems to be little by little “transforming our lives”. This transformation is social in nature, imaginary. Some talk of a “revolution”.

Undeniably, the mass surge of computers truly causes subtle modifications in certain cognitive and behavioral aptitudes. A dialectical movement is effectively established: the user acts on the prosthesis and the prosthesis reacts in return to the user.

Computers were initially used, around the time of World War II (only a few decades ago) to make exceptional calculations (such as calculating carpet bombing during a campaign of attrition warfare, calculating the physics of thermonuclear bombs, and sending missiles and rockets into space).

Nowadays, computers are at the very heart of our everyday lives.

The ideology that accompanies information technology sometimes has a tendency to replace spirituality, religions and famous ancient tales. Anthropologically, it is not too far from the truth to consider that we are seeing an increase in a “modernized” form of animism, whose numerical tools are techno-talismans. HMIs of cognitive prostheses are like “magic mirrors”, like doorways through which we address the spirits of “programs”.

Resorting to cognitive prostheses sometimes instigates increased dependency on external devices in order to be able to “think” in a normal way. An “enhanced” human, and “enhanced” cognition, is an expression that cannot avoid the question of a relative decrease in user independence.

Numerous cases of “disconnect anxiety” ⁵ related to separation from mobile phones or from the ability to make phone calls illustrate this state of dependency on a removable article. Fear of not being reachable and not being able to make calls is a source of stress and worry for a significant number of mobile phone users.

For those who have the greatest “addiction” to their device, we see a kind of memory externalization and, in return, such strong psychological internalization of the device that it is carried all day long.

It is important to note that many different kinds of detachable digital prostheses come from the same engineering practices, in similar laboratories.

For example, the Precision and Intelligence Laboratory at Tokyo Tech, on the Suzukakedai campus, carries out research on bionic limbs such as cognitive prostheses. A large proportion of the design work is at the software level. The form subsequently taken on by digital tools is of little importance.

Research is carried out at Koike Lab with a view to considering the various possibilities of controlling devices using thoughts. For the moment, there has been a high level of antagonism between two modes of HMI: biologically invasive HMIs and external HMIs. Either the interface is not invasive, but the time to detect the brain signal is slow, or acquisition of the signal is very fast but a concession is made to install an invasive interface, in other words a surgically established connection between nerves and micro-processors. Yet, invasive HMIs imply greater or lesser iatrogenic risks depending on the form of the endoprosthesis and the type of HMI. Pacemaker sensors already present a risk of infection. Matrices of gold threads placed in the brain or in contact with nerves are even more problematic.

The eye is in fact an extremely efficient means of receiving information. It is therefore the priority route for perception of outputs of an information technology system (using screens, Head-Up Displays and soon Google Glasses or smart contact lenses from the brand Innovega), without requiring surgery in the least.

Physiologically, the eye operates on the basis of light perceptions received by the retina, which is nerve tissue located in the eyeball. The retina is linked to the optic nerve and transmits the stimuli that are transformed into images in the nervous system. The optic nerve is an entirely separate part of the human brain.

The eye is fundamentally a “natural” biological interface between our mind and the world around us. First, the eye is used to see our environment when it is lit.

Conclusively, the interfacing between a human and an external digital prosthesis functions most of the time with a screen accompanied by a loudspeaker for the output and a keyboard/mouse system (or equivalent) paired with a microphone, or even a camera, for the input.

Myoelectric interfaces or thought-controlled systems are still at the development stage and are in fact mainly used for limb prostheses and not yet for cognitive prostheses (or in a way that is still too trivial).

The role of “window to the soul” that is played by the eye can also allow us to communicate. Indeed, the look that accompanies facial expressions conveys emotions and body language. A promising option for communication with an information technology tool consists of giving the computer a capacity to detect eye movements. Eye mobility can allow an information technology system to be controlled at a distance. For a certain period of time, this was the case for the MMI used by Stephen Hawking (researcher and victim of a degeneration of motor functions).

In the particular case of Stephen Hawking, who was almost completely paralyzed, the body was attached to the prosthesis. Instead, and paradoxically, it was the body that could be “detached” from the prosthesis. Without the use of implants, there was strong interdependence between Metal and the Flesh...

Table of contents

• Cover image
• Title page
• Table of Contents
• Dedication
• Copyright
• Preface
• Introduction
• 1: Typology of Prostheses and Interface Modes between Humans and Digital Systems
• 2: Design and Distribution of Detachable Digital Prostheses
• 3: Cyber-utopianism
• 4: Living with Digital Prostheses
• 5: The Addictive Nature of Cognitive Prostheses
• 6: Cognitive Prosthetics and Social Engineering
• 7: Potential Pedagogical Impact of Massive and Excessive Use of Cognitive Prosthetics
• 8: Body and Technology through the Concepts of the Cyborg and the Enhanced Human
• 9: The Economic and Environmental Impact and the Sustainability of Computer-based Prosthetics
• Conclusion
• References
• Index