New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Miley Cyrus and Macaroni Combo Enables Brain-Based ID

An individual's unique brain response to images of a celebrity and a food could be used to create an ID procedure at high-security sites.  

 

Getty Images/iStockphoto/Thinkstock (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In what may be hailed as one of the most significant scientific advances of all time, researchers have discovered a use for Adam Sandler and Brussels sprouts. Because when you look at pictures of celebrities like Sandler along with dishes like sprouts, your brain responds differently than anyone else’s. That unique pattern of brain activity—the neural equivalent of a fingerprint—can be used to identify you with perfect accuracy. So say scientists in a study in the journal IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security. [Maria V. Ruiz-Blondet, Zhanpeng Jin and Sarah Laszlo, CEREBRE: A Novel Method for Very High Accuracy Event-Related Potential Biometric Identification]

Last year this same team published work in which they recorded subjects’ responses to a series of words, like “podiatrist” or “sluice.” Because people’s brains respond differently to terms with which they are familiar—and no two people have the exact same vocabulary—showing someone enough words should produce a pattern of neural responses, in other words a brain print, unique to that individual. Indeed, the researchers found they could pinpoint one person out of a group of 32 with an accuracy of 97 percent.

But given the work’s potential security applications—think Pentagon entry or nuclear weapons command—the researchers wanted to push the technique further to achieve absolute certitude. So they decided to throw in pics of foods and famous folk about which people were likely to harbor strong personal preferences. Like liver and Angelina Jolie or halibut and Anne Hathaway.


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.


Fifty volunteers looked at 400 images while wearing a cap decorated with sensors that record the brain’s electrical activity. The resulting brain prints, which included the neural activity produced in response to celebs, foodstuffs, vocabulary, and some repetitive visual patterns, allowed the researchers to recognize each and every participant with no slipups.

Brain prints would beat fingerprints because fingerprints can be borrowed or stolen. Whereas no one can on Earth can ever know, much less replicate, exactly how your brain reacts when you see the word “mammoth” and pictures of mushrooms and Miley Cyrus.

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.] 

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