New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Neuroscientists Take Important Step toward Mind Reading

A new computer algorithm can guess what you are looking at based on brain activity alone

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Legions of science-fiction authors have imagined a future that includes mind-reading technology. Although the ability to play back memories like a movie remains a distant dream, a new study has taken a provocative step in that direction by decoding neural signals for images.

Neuroscientist Kendrick Kay and his colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley, were able to successfully determine which of a large group of never-before-seen photographs a subject was viewing based purely on functional MRI data. By analyzing fMRI scans of viewers as they looked at thousands of images, Kay’s team created a computer model that uses picture elements such as angles and brightness to predict the neural activity elicited by a novel black-and-white photograph. Then the researchers scanned subjects while showing them new snapshots. Most of the time Kay’s model could single out which image the subject was viewing by matching its prediction of brain activity to the actual activity measured by the fMRI scanner, although very similar pictures tended to baffle the program.

Kay’s reproduction of the age-old “pick a card, any card” trick is intriguing to visual neuroscience researchers because of his algorithm’s versatility. Perhaps more interesting to science-fiction buffs is Kay’s opinion that someday his algorithm might perform “at least some degree of [image] reconstruction” based on fMRI data. Starting from brain activity alone, his model should be able to deduce, for example, an image’s overall brightness. The team has not yet studied the model in this capacity, however; Kay says it is too early to gauge exactly how much information the program can glean from a brain scan.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


As for truly reading people’s thoughts, Kay does not foresee anything of that nature in this century. Technological improvement, he explains, may yield piles of brain data. Without sufficient insight into the brain’s workings, however, we will have no idea what it all means.

This story was originally printed with the title, "Can You Read My Mind?".

SA Mind Vol 19 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Neuroscientists Take Important Step toward Mind Reading” in SA Mind Vol. 19 No. 3 (), p. 11
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0608-11

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe