

Measuring Brainwaves to Make a New Kind of Bike Map for NYC - chippy
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/mindrider-manhattan-bike-map

======
corrconf
This isn't cool. The idea that you can 'measure' attention using a Neurosky
device is fairly close to being an outright lie. To measure EEG from someone
riding a bike in a controlled environment isn't an easy task. To claim that
you can measure EEG using a Neurosky device as someone cycles a bike around
NYC is simply lying.

This is EEG / BCI clickbait and it doesn't do people working in the field any
good at all.

~~~
devindotcom
Came here to express something like this. Some neuroscientists I talked to
recently for an article I wrote who specialize in brain-computer interfaces
and neural decoding told me the mass market EEG headsets are basically trash.
I don't trust any work done with them as the primary source, this project
included.

The article, if you're interested:
[http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/wishful-thinking-
can-...](http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/wishful-thinking-can-
scientists-really-read-your-brain-n246311)

~~~
robg
I'm a neuroscientist with a decade in fMRI and that criticism is unwarranted.
Scalp based EEG is inherently noisy but if hundreds toward thousands of people
are using these, there's a real chance the signal could overwhelm the noise.

What's the alternative? A bunch of lab-based studies? Those have their own
severe problems. Research isn't zero sum. Every little bit counts.

~~~
dmicah
I'm also work in (applied) cognitive neuroscience and disagree with respect to
the utility of these studies (ie "every little bit counts"). Pop-neuroscience
articles that make large claims have the potential to poison the well in terms
of the public's interest in, and the reputation of, neuroscience. Too much
hype in a field has the potential to create a backlash, as in the "AI Winter"
of the 1980s.

~~~
robg
I've watched fMRI (the God region of the brain!) studies poison the well. Pop-
science is an endless, multimedia beast. Research that replicates is truth
winning out. Everything else, including many high profile journal articles, is
just noise.

------
karmacondon
The map contained in this article may not represent the most scientific
measurement, given that each street was mapped once by one person, but they
had to start somewhere. This is a brilliant idea, though.

I've always been interested in the idea of collecting additional layers of
information. Places are associated with emotions and we don't have any good
ways of capturing that right now. I can think of several interesting future
applications of this concept, given advances in technology and cultural
adoption. It would be interesting to look at a map of the city and see where
people where most happy, inspired or awed so that you could go there if you're
feeling down. You could also get an idea of places to avoid, other than the
obvious dark alleys. Law enforcement could map the emotional states of victims
and suspects in space to better understand the course of events in a crime, or
people could map their daily feelings of anxiety to better understand what
triggers their own happiness. Employers could find out what areas of their
office cause the most unhappiness (meeting rooms?) and the most relaxation,
and potential employees could get an overall gauge of the stress level of a
given work environment. It almost seems like something out of Star Trek.
Someone pulls out their tricorder and says "We don't know what happened to the
last people who beamed down here, but it says they were very anxious and
afraid. Set phasers to stun."

There are questions about the general efficacy of measuring brainwaves, but
receiving more information is generally a good thing. Biking seems like a good
place to start, if only because people are already wearing bulky helmets so
recording equipment won't look or feel too out of place. This concept
obviously as a long way to go, but there's a lot of potential. Anything that
allows people to see the world in a new way can have a big impact, even if it
isn't immediately clear how.

~~~
devindotcom
_There are questions about the general efficacy of measuring brainwaves_

I'm afraid this underestimates the case somewhat. As I wrote in another
comment, people in the field have been very frank with me in their total
distrust of toy systems like Neurosky. Anyone claiming to track moods or mind
states right now is hugely overstating their capabilities. I like the idea as
much as the next guy, but at the present it's not questionable, it's simply
impossible. We don't have the tools or the data with which to adequately apply
them.

~~~
robg
You are greatly overstating the complaints. It's not impossible at all. These
efforts trade precision and control for quantity and real world conditions.
That's a very fair trade off and the results remain to be seen and improved
upon, not dismissed out of hand.

------
antr
This reminds me of the DUMBO Neural Cartography by a team at the Architecture
School at Columbia:
[http://www.thecloudlab.org/dumbo_neural_cartography.html](http://www.thecloudlab.org/dumbo_neural_cartography.html)

------
artifaxx
This is really cool, if they can get a decent sample size I bet this will
become quite enlightening. Until then, just cool.

------
robg
I really love this work by Arlene and her team but the graphic here is each
street mapped on one ride by one rider.

~~~
artifaxx
Yeah, but they have a concept. I really hope they follow through with it.

