In a fast-moving car, the brain can be faster than the rate hit the brakes. Relying on brain waves, indicating an intent to jam on the brakes, a new technology could shave critical milliseconds response time, researchers report online on July 28 in the Journal of neural Engineering.
The work adds to a growing trend in technology, which helps drivers. Although it may eventually lead to the improvement of the emergency braking signal the brain, new technology is not ready to go.
"As a study of basic sciences and was quite impressed," says cognitive neuroscientist Raja Parasuraman of George Mason University in Fairfax, VA. "I think it still requires a lot more."
Research computer scientist Stefan Haufe Berlin Institute of Technology in Germany and his colleagues measured brain wave changes, while the participants drove in car simulator.
The participants drove about 60 miles per hour, after the lead car at the hairpin road with heavy traffic oncoming. So often the lead car would slam on his brakes, so that the participant would have to do the same in either crash.
Most of the drivers of delay between the lead car, stopping and slamming the brakes themselves were around 700 milliseconds. The specific neural signatures are visible through this lag time, and may be early indicators that drivers wanted to brake.
Whether Haufe "our approach was that the driver intends to more quickly than it actually might work," he says. "That's what the neural signature is good for."
Haufe and his colleagues designed a system that detected and interpreted these neural patterns. In the simulation system, which included EMG data from the electrical activity of muscles of the legs, roughly 130 milliseconds faster than the driver for the unaided eye, the team reports. For a car travelling at 60 miles per hour, this time difference translates to about 3.7 meters to stopping distance — the length of some compact cars.
Peak performance system will incorrectly slam on the brakes nearly twice per hour, the rate of false alarms, which you will fail if the system is to be useful, Parasuraman says. "We all hate alarms that go beyond whether or not there is a risk, such as fire alarm that goes off when there is no fire," he says. "Even the rate of 1 per cent of false alarms would not be acceptable for most people."
And even if people can be convinced to wear the CAP EEG cumbersome and lets you drive, the introduction of driver assistance technology can bring a different set of problems, "says Parasuraman. People may become overly reliant on technologies and reduce their vigilance on the road.
Found in: Body and brain and humans
No comments:
Post a Comment