Category Archives: Neurotechnology

Existing implants are thinner, more flexible, and more elastic. These properties make the neuroprosthetic devices more suitable to the mechanical properties of brain tissue.

However, these properties also make the implants more fragile and less durable. Also, removing these implants is quite tricky or, lets say, impossible as it generally requires invasive surgery.

EPFL engineers have taken a step towards biodegradable and non-invasive implants. They have developed a neural interface that disappears harmlessly in the body after several months and allows natural tissue to grow back.

Their new generation implants are made of polymers that deteriorate naturally after several months. It can be used in both medium and long-term applications such as monitoring epileptic activity or supporting neurorehabilitation after an injury.

Diego Ghezzi, a professor at EPFLs School of Engineering and holder of the Medtronic Chair in Neuroengineering, said,Our implant eliminates the need for invasive surgery, as it can be implanted in a patients blood vessel.

Adele Fanelli, a Ph.D. student at Ghezzis lab, said,We modeled our implant after stents, which are used to widen arteries and veins. The surgical procedure has become fairly routine, and the recovery time is short.

Because its made out of polymers rather than metal, it tends not to provoke a strong inflammatory reaction.

Ghezzi said,Our research shows its possible to develop minimally invasive neuroprostheses that interact with the surrounding tissue. This opens up new possibilities for applications in neurotechnology and expands the range of patients who can benefit from them.

Read the original post:

Next-generation implants will be non-invasive - Tech Explorist

The days of living inside a biological human shell are almost over. At least thats what futurists are hoping for, as we roll out more advanced neurotechnology that allows humans to interface directly with machines. Its possibly both the most exciting and most alarming thing happening in life sciences right now.

We previously looked at how the startup landscape of brain-computer interfaces (BCI) is changing. Theres Kernel, a startup that provides BCI technology through its new business model, neuroscience as a service (NaaS). Mr. Elon Musks pet neuroscience company, Neuralink, showed off a monkey playing Pong using just its thoughts. And researchers have been able to develop a BCI technology where electrodes were jabbed into the brain of a patient with paralysis and gave him the power to write on a screen using just his mind. A recent Nature article highlights another breakthrough in BCI a new high-performance technology that can allow users to write up to 90 characters per minute at 94% accuracy with just their thoughts. Thats almost as fast and (though maybe less accurate) as hormone-filled teenagers texting late at night.

As Arthur C. Clarke once said, Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. While were still waiting for telekinesis and telepathy to be made available through the app store, here are nine neurotechnology companies creating simpler magic between human flesh and machine.

New Yawk City-based Synchron was founded in 2016 to develop bioelectronic devices to help patients with limited movement and disabilities to interface with the physical world. We covered Synchron after theyd taken in $10 million from a Series A in 2016. Previous investors included the shadowy government agency known as DARPA. The company has since raised a total of $42.6 million after a recent Series B infusion of $32.6 million led by Khosla Ventures. The startup is building minimally invasive devices and received breakthrough device designation from the FDA last August. The current Stentrode device is embedded into the jugular vein and uses sensors to pick up on brain activity.

The company is taking on amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a neurodegenerative disease that leads to loss of motor control over muscles. Two patients with ALW were able to control computers with mouse clicks of 92% accuracy and type at 14 to 20 words per minute.

Founded in 2008, Blackrock Neurotech is a startup headquartered in Salt Lake City thats raised $10 million, with bloodthirsty billionaire Peter Thiel throwing his own cash into the ring. The company is developing implantable technologies to help patients walk, talk, see, hear, and feel. Blackrock Neurotech claims to be the first company to provide tetraplegic patients the power to control robotic limbs using the mind, as well as being the first to help ALS patients communicate with a mind-driven audio speller. Its technology relies on FDA-approved in-brain implants with an expiration date of seven years, with wireless devices in the works.

The company also provides neurotechnology hardware for a range of applications, from treating pain to epilepsy.

Founded in 2016, Bahstun-based Pison Technology is a startup thats pulling together the hardware and software to build out wearable technologies that allow humans to control machines using gestures. The company is a spin-off from MIT and has raised $7.1 million that included Bose after a Series A that closed earlier this year. Pison is developing neurotechnology that captures the neuromuscular signals on the surface of the skin, which are analyzed using its proprietary machine learning algorithms to control electronics. The idea is for the wearable technology to predict the intention of the user, rather than the users body having to actually act out the motion. Pisons first target are patients with ALS. The goal is to provide them with a way to access the digital world using mind control.

MindPortal, a San Francisco-based company founded in 2019, brought in $5 million following a recent Seed round that included everyones favorite tech accelerator, Y Combinator. MindPortal is building a non-invasive wearable brain-computer interface where users connect with virtual reality and simulations, as well as communicate with each other using thoughts. Imagine shooting goons in Call of Duty with just your mind and 14-year-old gamers instantly telling you how much you suck telepathically after pulling off a headshot. Were talking serious gameplay here. And much like other VR applications, more adult activities will probably become its most lucrative niche. The device looks like something Geordi La Forge might wear:

MindPortals technology uses a patent-pending wearable that can record human brain activity with 10 to 100 times more precision than EEG technology. Were not really sure what that means in practical terms, but it sounds impressive.

Israel-headquartered Wearable Devices was founded in 2014 to develop a brain-computer interface using a wristband called Mudra. It has raised a total of $3.5 million after bringing in $1.5 million through a Convertible Note that closed in 2019. The wristband picks up on a set of six hand gestures originating from the nervous system through the wrist. Deep-learning algorithms translate electronic signals and classify them as a user-intended gesture. Each gesture defines and transmits a unique interaction with the device. There is a version specifically for Apple Watch users.

The company is focusing its attention on applications in the augmented reality and gaming industries. Time to take Wii Sports to the next level.

San Francisco-based Arctop was founded in 2016 and has brought in $5 million from a Seed round of $4 million that closed in 2019. The startup is developing software to decode brain signals and is providing its product as a software-as-aservice (SaaS). The AI software converts feelings and attention into real-time responses, and is designed to interface with headphones, AR/VR systems, and earbuds for gaming, e-learning, digital health, and video/audio streaming.

Between human-like robots and realistic Japanese waifu simulators, the Land of the Rising Sun has always been at the forefront of technology. Tokyo-based MELTIN MMI is taking brain-computer interface to the next level with a focus on biosensors and robotic arms. Founded in 2013, the company has raised $20.6 million after $18.3 million was brought in 2018 from an investment led by Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, one of the major pharmaceutical companies in Japan.

The companys technology relies on taking in bio-signals and converting them into highly sensitive robotic movements with a total of 12 types of complex movements. MELTIN MMI has developed a cyborg hand that can interpret signals and do such complex tasks such as holding an egg (without cracking it), picking up a laptop, and unscrewing a bottle cap from a bottle. Response time between the operator and the robotic hand is 0.02 seconds. The company has even been able to operate the robot more than 11,000 miles away. No Zoom-like lag here.

Founded in 2017, Maryland-based MindX has raised $1.9 million after a $1.75 million Seed round that closed in January 2020. The company is building a look-and-think interface that allows users to control digital objects spatially on displays. Its core technology was developed out of a $200 million DARPA-funded research program at John Hopkins University. Not much is known about the company as it just came out of stealth mode in 2019.

Founded in 2018, Brooklyn-based Neurosity has brought in $175k following a Seed round to design headwear that teaches programmers to concentrate for long periods of time. The technology is called the Crown, which looks a lot like sleek headphones for your brain. The device is meant to guide users into the flow state as a productivity hack. Other uses for the technology include monitoring mental illness and preventing road-side fatigue. Red Bull not required.

The next digital revolution will be played on fully immersive virtual landscapes hooked up to your brain and interfaced with reality. And the next unicorn might just be the one that discovers how to create advertising space in these hybrid worlds. Maybe one day well be able to build entire robotic manufacturing empires using just our minds, while sippin pineapple coladas on the beach. A true digital nomads dream.

Tech investing is extremely risky. Minimize your risk withour stock research, investment tools, and portfolios, andfind out which tech stocks you should avoid. Become a Nanalyze Premium member and find out today!

Read more:

9 Neurotechnology Companies Merging Humans and Machines - Nanalyze

The report on the Face Recognition Technology market provides a birds eye view of the current proceeding within the Face Recognition Technology market. Further, the report also takes into account the impact of the novel COVID-19 pandemic on the Face Recognition Technology market and offers a clear assessment of the projected market fluctuations during the forecast period. The different factors that are likely to impact the overall dynamics of the Face Recognition Technology market over the forecast period (2020-2026) including the current trends, growth opportunities, restraining factors, and more are discussed in detail in the market study.

Face Recognition Technology Market report provides in-depth review of the Expansion Drivers, Potential Challenges, Distinctive Trends, and Opportunities for market participants equip readers to totally comprehend the landscape of the Face Recognition Technology market. Major prime key manufactures enclosed within the report alongside Market Share, Stock Determinations and Figures, Contact information, Sales, Capacity, Production, Price, Cost, Revenue and Business Profiles are (Crossmatch, Techno Brain, Nviso, Neurotechnology, Cognitec Systems, Gemalto, Idemia, Facefirst Inc., NEC, Animetrics, Daon, Keylemon, Ayonix, IBM, 3M, Herta Security, Nuance Communications). The main objective of the Face Recognition Technology industry report is to Supply Key Insights on Competition Positioning, Current Trends, Market Potential, Growth Rates, and Alternative Relevant Statistics.

Get Free Sample PDF (including COVID19 Impact Analysis, full TOC, Tables and Figures) of Face Recognition Technology Market Report @ https://www.researchmoz.us/enquiry.php?type=S&repid3120382?utm_source=Sanjay

Face Recognition Technology Market By Capability, Production and Share By Manufacturers, Top 3 and Top 5 Manufacturers,Face Recognition Technology Market Share of Manufacturers, Revenue and Share By Manufacturers, Producing Base Distribution, Sales Area, Product Kind, Market Competitive Scenario And Trends, Market Concentration Rate.

Later, the report gives detailed analysis about the major factors fuelling the expansion of Face Recognition Technology Market in the coming years. Some of the major factors driving the growth of Face Recognition Technology Market are-

Face Recognition Technology Market Regional Analysis Includes:

Moving forward, the researched report gives details about the strategies applied by companies as well as new entrants to expand its presence in the market.On the basis on the end users/applications,this report focuses on the status and outlook for major applications/end users, sales volume, Face Recognition Technology market share and growth rate of Face Recognition Technology foreach application, including-

On the basis of product,this report displays the sales volume, revenue (Million USD), product price, Face Recognition Technology market share and growth rate ofeach type, primarily split into-

The market study report also fragments the market on basis regions and sub regions. Furthermore, discusses the contribution of major regions that are likely to influence the market in the coming years.

Key Questions Answered in the Report:-

Do You Have Any Query Or Specific Requirement? Ask to Our Industry Expert @ https://www.researchmoz.us/enquiry.php?type=E&repid3120382?utm_source=Sanjay

Some of the Major Highlights of TOC covers:

1 Face Recognition Technology Introduction and Market Overview1.1 Objectives of the Study1.2 Overview of Face Recognition Technology1.3 Scope of the Study1.4 Methodology of the Study1.5 Research Data Source

2 Executive Summary2.1 Market Overview2.2 Business Environment Analysis

3 Industry Chain Analysis3.1 Upstream Raw Material Suppliers of Face Recognition Technology Analysis3.2 Major Players of Face Recognition Technology3.3 Face Recognition Technology Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis3.4 Market Distributors of Face Recognition Technology3.5 Major Downstream Buyers of Face Recognition Technology Analysis3.6 The Impact of Covid-19 from the Perspective of Industry Chain3.7 Regional Import and Export Controls Will Exist for a Long Time3.8 Continued downward PMI Spreads Globally

4 Global Face Recognition Technology Market, by Type

5 Face Recognition Technology Market, by Application

6 Global Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis by Regions6.1 Global Face Recognition Technology Sales, Revenue and Market Share by Regions6.2 North America Face Recognition Technology Sales and Growth Rate (2015-2020)6.3 Europe Face Recognition Technology Sales and Growth Rate (2015-2020)6.4 Asia-Pacific Face Recognition Technology Sales and Growth Rate (2015-2020)6.5 Middle East and Africa Face Recognition Technology Sales and Growth Rate (2015-2020)6.6 South America Face Recognition Technology Sales and Growth Rate (2015-2020)

7 North America Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis by Countries

8 Europe Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis by Countries

9 Asia Pacific Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis by Countries

10 Middle East and Africa Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis by Countries

11 South America Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis by Countries

12 Competitive Landscape

13 Industry Outlook13.1 Market Driver Analysis13.2 Merger, Acquisition and New Investment13.3 News of Product Release

14 Global Face Recognition Technology Market Forecast14.1 Global Face Recognition Technology Market Value & Volume Forecast, by Type (2020-2025)14.2 Global Face Recognition Technology Market Value & Volume Forecast, by Application (2020-2025)14.3 Face Recognition Technology Market Analysis and Forecast by Region

15 New Project Feasibility Analysis15.1 Industry Barriers and New Entrants SWOT Analysis15.2 Analysis and Suggestions on New Project Investment

For More Information Kindly Contact:

ResearchMoz.usFollow me on Blogger: https://trendingrelease.blogspot.com/

See the article here:

Face Recognition Technology Market 2021 by Global Key Players, Types, Applications, Countries, Industry Size and Forecast to 2026 The Courier - The...

By Kathleen J. Sullivan

Stanford has announced the winners of the 2021 university awards honoring faculty, students and staff for exceptional service, distinctive contributions to undergraduate education and excellence in teaching.

Last week, President Marc Tessier-Lavigne personally congratulated each of the nine winners during phone or video calls.

The nine winners will be publicly recognized on June 13 at the Commencement Ceremony for the Senior Class of 2021. The in-person ceremony, which will be livestreamed, will take place at 9:30 a.m. (PDT) in Stanford Stadium.

Stanford remains committed to holding a future in-person 2020 graduation ceremony, which will publicly recognize the 2020 winners of the Cuthbertson, Dinkelspiel and Gores awards announced in March 2021. The ceremony was delayed due to the pandemic.

TheKenneth M. Cuthbertson Award for Contributions to Stanford University, which recognizes extraordinary contributions to the achievement of the universitys goals, is open to all members of the Stanford community. This years winners are Jan Barker-Alexander and Thomas Fenner.

Jan Barker-Alexander (Image credit: Sean McKibbon)

Jan Barker-Alexander, assistant vice provost for inclusion and community, and executive director of the Centers for Equity, Community and Leadership, and the Offices of First Generation and/or Low-Income Programs and for Military-Affiliated Communities, was honored for her empathy, love and tireless devotion to advocacy for Black, underserved and historically marginalized students and community members.

Barker-Alexander, who is the resident fellow (RF) of Ujamaa House, was commended for her transformational leadership of the undergraduate residence, which focuses on the histories, issues and cultures of the Black diaspora. In Fall 2020, the Ujamaa RF position became the first-ever endowed position in residential education and was named in her honor.

She was also honored for her visionary work in establishing important programs to promote diversity, including revamping the Ernest Houston Johnson Scholars Program, which is named after the first Black student to graduate from Stanford in the pioneer Class of 1895. The program exposes first-year students to research opportunities, faculty-led projects and guidance on the professoriate as a career option, with the ultimate goal of building the pipeline to academia.

Barker-Alexander was also commended for supporting students in their principled activism.

Thomas Fenner (Image credit: Courtesy Thomas Fenner)

Thomas Fenner, deputy general counsel in the Office of the General Counsel, was honored for his ability to build warm and engaging rapport, even while navigating delicate and difficult legal and ethical considerations.

He was commended for his remarkable memory and his mastery of the intricacies of the law and for his strong sense of empathy, which fuels his efforts to achieve positive outcomes.

Fenner was also honored for his deep institutional knowledge and his constant dedication to the universitys mission.

TheLloyd W. Dinkelspiel Award for Distinctive Contributions to Undergraduate Education recognizes distinctive and exceptional contributions to undergraduate education or the quality of student life at Stanford. This years winners are Lisa Hwang, Jennifer Rolen, Chloe Stoddard and Constanza Hasselmann.

Lisa Hwang (Image credit: Courtesy Stanford Engineering)

Lisa Hwang, senior lecturer in chemical engineering in the School of Engineering, was honored for her tireless efforts in advocating for, supporting and fostering community between educators and students on campus through course re-design and professional development for faculty.

She was commended for her remarkable leadership in modernizing the departments curriculum with an emphasis on active learning and inclusive learning practices.

Hwang was also honored for her instrumental work in developing online lab courses during the pandemic to ensure a meaningful learning experience for students.

She was also commended for showing great personal dedication to investing in others, through mentoring and advising hundreds of undergraduates and junior faculty, and training teaching assistants.

Jennifer Rolen (Image credit: Stefanie Ky)

Jennifer Rolen, assistant dean and associate director of the First Generation and/or Low-Income (FLI) Office, was honored for developing, supporting and nurturing the FLI community and valuing diversity across our community.

She was commended for fostering strong relationships with students, often guiding and supporting them through difficult challenges.

Rolen was also honored for her tremendous contributions to the Stanford FLI Conference, which has been attended by hundreds of students and administrators over the past four years.

She was also commended for her thoughtful engagement with student leadership to spread the ethos of pride and the FLI identity, both at Stanford and beyond.

Chloe Stoddard (Image credit: Therese Santiago)

Chloe Stoddard, a candidate for a bachelors degree with honors in international relations, with a minor in human rights, in the School of Humanities and Sciences, was honored for her commitment to gender equity on campus, co-founding Stanford Womxn in Law, the Stanford Womens March and the Student Advisory Board on Sexual Violence Prevention.

She was commended for her thoughtful and purposeful leadership, which demonstrates an innate ability to create movements and organizations that are intentionally inclusive and uplifting.

Stoddard was also honored for forging a partnership between Habla and Stanford Womxn in Law to better serve workers at Stanford in need of legal support and advocacy. Habla is a community-engaged learning organization in which students teach English as a second language to native Spanish-speaking workers on campus.

She was also commended for her dedication to multi-faceted and interwoven approaches to activism, resulting in changes to sexual harassment and assault education curriculum and more comprehensive sexual violence response training for residential staff members.

Constanza Hasselmann (Image credit: Courtesy Constanza Hasselmann)

Constanza Hasselmann is a candidate for a masters degree in sustainability science and practice in the School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences, and a candidate for a bachelors degree with honors in sociology, with a minor in human rights, in the School of Humanities and Sciences.

Hasselmann was honored for founding the Public Interest Technology Lab at Stanford, which hosts events and engages in advocacy to encourage thoughtful innovation with a focus on recruitment, racial justice and bridging disciplines.

She was commended for her tremendous contributions to the creation of Computer Science 184, including recruiting students, designing course curriculum and building the case for course approval.

Hasselmann was also honored for her tireless advocacy for student participation in the activities of the Ethics, Society and Technology Lab.

TheWalter J. Gores Awardrecognizes undergraduate and graduate teaching excellence. This years winners are Justin Du Bois, Guosong Hong and Emily Schell.

Justin Du Bois (Image credit: Courtesy Justin Du Bois)

Justin Du Bois is the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Chemistry in the School of Humanities and Sciences, and professor, by courtesy, of chemical and systems biology in the School of Medicine.

He was honored for his steadfast dedication to his students, often staying after class to discuss material and create intensely detailed lecture notes, in addition to weekly tutorials, problem sets and review sessions.

Du Bois was commended for bringing his passion and enthusiasm into the classroom by showcasing the importance of chemical concepts to human life and disease, and for his distinctive approach to learning, including a willingness to sacrifice less-important content to ensure a strong grasp of the core material.

He was also honored for putting in hundreds of hours beyond the call of duty to dramatically improve the educational experience of his students.

Guosong Hong (Image credit: Courtesy Guosong Hong)

Guosong Hong, assistant professor of materials science and engineering in the School of Engineering, was honored for his broad knowledge, extensive experience and sharp insights in the field of neurotechnology.

He was commended for creating engaging, well-organized course content that inspires students imaginations and aspirations and draws students from across many different disciplines.

Hong was also honored for his caring, personable treatment of students, which epitomizes the intellectual excitement and sense of engaged community that Stanford is known for.

He was also commended for his scientific multilingualism and his keen ability to lay the necessary groundwork for relevant biology and neuroscience concepts in a comprehensive way for all his students.

Emily Schell (Image credit: Courtesy Emily Schell)

Emily Schell, a doctoral candidate in developmental psychological sciences in the Graduate School of Education, and a minor in psychology in the School of Humanities and Sciences, was honored for her thoughtful dedication to her students, often curating educational and personal support systems to fit individual needs.

Schell was commended for deploying innovative strategies to create an environment that encourages questions, uplifts responses and offers additional resources and office hours for her students.

She was also honored for her contagious passion for service learning, which inspires students to connect their academic learning with real-world problems that need solutions.

Schell was also commended for her effective collaborations with other graduate students and faculty in adopting new technologies and student-centered pedagogy.

Read more from the original source:

Stanford announces 2021 Cuthbertson, Dinkelspiel and Gores awards - Stanford Today - Stanford University News

A new report published today (Tuesday 1 June) has set out how the UK can support the rapid and safe introduction of fusion energy as the technology develops.

Produced by the Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC), an independent expert committee which identifies regulation required to foster technical innovation, the report makes recommendations on how fusion energy should be regulated in light of its inherently lower risk than nuclear alternatives.

Fusion is the process that powers the sun. A fusion power plant would combine hydrogen atoms to generate energy without giving off the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change. The UK hopes to deliver the worlds first prototype fusion power plant, STEP (Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production), by 2040.

The RHC report states that innovation-friendly regulation will allow the technology to be rolled out quickly and safely, boosting the confidence of both the public and investors.

Science Minister Amanda Solloway said:

Fusion energy has enormous potential, offering an inexhaustible source of zero-carbon energy and helping us to cement the UKs position as a science superpower.

Todays report helps put the foundations in place to deliver the worlds first prototype fusion plant by 2040 and ensures we can capitalise on the exciting innovation taking place right here in the UK.

Focusing on the STEP programme announced in October 2019, the report recommends the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Environment Agency lead on developing current regulations and putting the best framework in place for the technology to flourish.

Due to the lower risk associated with fusion that with nuclear fission, the report recommends that the current regulatory approach, led by HSE and the Environment Agency, is the most appropriate framework and that the more stringent regulations applied to nuclear energy would be disproportionate.

To ensure the target of delivering a fusion plant by 2040 is met, the report also recommends the government consults with business and the public on its plans for fusion energy in summer 2021 and begins a public awareness programme to increase understanding of the topic. Additionally, it advises that a joint guidance document is produced by EA, HSE and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) to provide further clarity and ensure confidence in the technology.

Following the publication of the report, the government has today confirmed that it will launch a consultation on fusion energy regulation later this year, allowing industry and the public to have their say. The government has published an interim response to the RHC report and will respond to the report in full in early 2022 after its consultation.

Fusion is currently regulated by the Environment Agency (EA) and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in England. Legislation which determines environmental protection regulation for fusion apply in England only and is enforced by EA. Regulators in each of the other nations in the UK have the responsibility for carrying out this same function. Health and Safety regulation, currently enforced by HSE, applies across Great Britain but is devolved in Northern Ireland where the Health and Safety Executive Northern Ireland have responsibility.

The Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC) is an independent committee, sponsored by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), that identifies the implications of technological innovation. It provides government with impartial, expert advice on the regulatory reform required to support its rapid and safe introduction of new technologies.

It was set up further to recommendations from the governments white paper on Regulating for the Fourth Industrial Revolution and started the fusion energy regulation report in September 2020, alongside other reports on genetic technologies, medical devices, and remotely piloted aircraft systems. It has recently selected the areas of work it will cover later this year, which are pro-innovation regulatory principles, neurotechnology, AI in healthcare, and hydrogen.

Fusion energy research aims to bring the power source of the stars down to earth to give us low-carbon electricity for millennia to come. When light nuclei fuse to form a heavier nucleus, they release bursts of energy. This is the opposite of nuclear fission the reaction that is used in nuclear power stations today in which energy is released when a nucleus splits apart to form smaller nuclei. For additional detail on fusion energy please consult the UKAEAs Fusion in brief guide.

Read more:

New proposals to support rapid and safe rollout of fusion energy - GOV.UK

What Does Neurotechnology Mean?

Neurotechnology as a new prominent tech term describes any technology that helps us to understand brain function, or enables a direct connection of technology with the human nervous system.

Since the technology world has made rapid advances in both observational technology for the human brain and cognitive modeling technology in artificial intelligence, there's a grey area in terms of what constitutes neurotechnology.

One of the most interesting ways to examine the field of neurotechnology is to ask the question of whether neural networks constitute a neurotechnology or not.

If you go from the literal definition of new technology as technology that brings us new understanding of the actual human brain, it could be suggested that neural networks are slightly different in that they attempt to build a corresponding system based on artificial neurons to help computers think more like humans.

You could also say, though, that since neural networks do illuminate contrasting activity with the human brain, they are a type of newer technology. Likewise, physical systems built with arduinos can be described as neurotechnology in the sense that they may imitate or model human cognitive behavior or the anatomy of the human brain in some way.

In that sense, the field of neural technology is vast and diverse. From digital EEGs to complex simulations of human brain function, neurotechnology has tremendous potential, as in some ways, we are starting to converge the cognitive processes of both humans and machines.

Other types of neurotechnology are directly applied for instance, new research on electrodes that will connect directly to the human brain, to reveal more about its exact functions.

Originally posted here:

What is Neurotechnology? - Definition from Techopedia

Story by Wayne Gillam | UW ECE News

Jessie Owen (right), who has a spinal cord injury, spoke at a recent roundtable about her decision to participate in a research study led by UW ECE senior postdoctoral researcher Dr. Fatma Inanici in the lab of UW ECE associate professor Chet Moritz. This study was funded by the Center for Neurotechnology, which Moritz co-directs and of which Dr. Inanici is a member. Owen described what the experience was like and how neurotechnology has impacted her life. In this photo, Dr. Inanici is applying small patches that will deliver electrical currents on the surface of the skin, over the injured area in Owens neck. This electrical stimulation helps the brain to reestablish connections with nerves in the spinal cord. 2018 photo by Marcus Donner

At the age of 27, Jessie Owen was in a devastating car accident that left her with a severe spinal cord injury. She lost much of the function in her hands, arms and legs, and she was diagnosed with central spinal cord syndrome. Her brains ability to send and receive signals to and from the parts of her body below her neck was severely impaired. She had to take a leave of absence from her job as a teacher, and she has since been dependent on a wheelchair and caregivers for day-to-day living.

In 201819 she participated in a groundbreaking research study led by UW ECE senior postdoctoral researcher Dr. Fatma Inanici in the lab of UW ECE associate professor Chet Moritz. This study was funded by the Center for Neurotechnology, which Moritz co-directs and of which Dr. Inanici is a member. In the study, the research team used a device provided by the Centers industry affiliate Onward to apply noninvasive, electrical stimulation to the site of Owens spinal cord injury. This was aimed at improving her hand and arm function. Owen experienced significant functional gains as a result of participating in the study, which enabled her to live much more independently.

Owen spoke at the Spring 2021 CNT End-user Roundtable, which is a space for CNT students, faculty and staff to learn from people with disabilities and potential end users of neurotechnology. The event was organized by CNT Associate Director of Diversity Scott Bellman and moderated by Moritz. Owen took questions from the audience about her decision to participate in the study, what the experience was like for her and how it has impacted her life.

Below this video, which shows how Owen benefited from participating in the study, are some questions from the Roundtable audience and Owens responses, lightly edited for clarity.

Welcome to the CNT End-user Roundtable, Jessie! We appreciate you taking the time today to be with us.

Thank you! Im happy to be here. So, let me tell you a little bit about how I got to be here. At the very end of December 2012, I was in a car accident going over Highway 2 here in Washington. A tree fell on our car, and I sustained a severe spinal cord injury. I broke my neck at the C3 / C4 level. I went to Harborview Medical Center, and I was at Harborview for three to four months. By the time I left, I still had not gained enough function back to drive a power wheelchair with my hand. I was still driving it with my chin.

And then, I got into a skilled nursing facility because I had some broken bones, and I had some other things that needed to heal. For about two years after that time, I did exercise therapy the best I could. I was able to go from a chin drive to a hand drive on my wheelchair. And I did learn to stand, to get up from chairs and transfer [from one seat to another], but my hand function was still pretty low.

I have central spinal cord syndrome, so my legs tend to work a little bit better than my arms, which was great in some ways but frustrating in others. So, I was living with a friend at the time as I continued exercise therapy. I stayed stagnant in my recovery for about two years. I learned to walk a little bit with crutches, but I was definitely using my power wheelchair all the time because its not like I could open a door, or grab things, or cook or any of those things.

Moritz (left) and Dr. Inanici (center) observe as Jon Schlueter (right), a participant who took part in the same study as Owen, measures grip strength by squeezing the device in his hand. Schlueter has sensors on his arms (black cases) to measure his arm muscle activity during the task. 2019 photo by Marcus Donner

What brought you to the study?

I strongly believe that if we want to see change in the spinal cord community and in science, I need to be an active participant. And so over the years, I participated in some studies whenever they came up. When this one with Chet and Fatma came up, I met with them, and they said I might be a good candidate because I had some function in my hands, even though I didnt have great function.

What did you expect from the study?

Honestly, I didnt expect a lot out of it. We just dont know enough scientifically about how to treat spinal cord injuries, so I thought that it was just going to be a feel good experience for me because I was doing my part to help advance science. It was about two years ago when I participated in this study, and I experienced way more results than I anticipated.

In that time, I was able to go from living with a friend to buying my own house, to living independently, to receiving at least 50% less caregiving. My hand function is still not 100%, its not, but it has improved enough to allow me to do a lot of different things, and it has made a significant impact in my life, and that is why Im here.

Owen practices her fine motor skills by using childrens blocks while UW undergraduate researcher Megan Knoernschild reviews data on the electrical stimulation device provided by Center for Neurotechnology industry affiliate Onward. 2018 photo by Marcus Donner

Could you give us some examples of some things that you couldnt do before the study but that you can do now?

Yeah, you know, there are so many of them. One is that I can cook now. I still dont take anything out of the oven (thats pretty scary), but I can do just about anything on the stovetop. I feel much more comfortable using a knife to cut something because even though my right hand is still pretty ridiculous, its open enough that I can stabilize an onion, while I carefully cut on the other side.

I can tie my shoes. I can walk my dog easier because I can clip the leash on him. I can take pictures on my phone. I can actually open my hand and take pictures on my phone without it being a huge struggle. I started a journal, and now I write in it every day, about three to five sentences. Thats something that I could maybe do before the study, but it was so tedious. It still takes me longer than the average person, but its not so painful that its not enjoyable. I take my time, and I like writing.

Another big one is that Im a teacher, and before the study, I really struggled with figuring out how to teach without being able to write very well or use the technology because my fingers werent working. Now, I can point to things better, I can pick stuff up and write more quickly. I feel more confident as a teacher because I have just that little bit more hand function that allows me to do more.

Do you still receive spinal stimulation? If not, were you able to keep the functional gains you made in the study?

I havent received any additional stimulation in the two years since the study. I would say that about 90% of my functional gains remain. I have a lot more hand function in my left hand. I can still keep my right hand open, and I can carefully grasp something with it. The progress Ive made has sustained. I definitely havent gone down significantly, maybe a tiny bit right after the study ended, but I still have enough function for me to live as independently as possible. Im still receiving 50% less care than I was before. Ive honestly just been a lot happier. Youre happier when you have independence.

When you start out with very little function, even regaining 30% more function at a very low level means a huge deal, so its been really meaningful for me to be able to keep the gains that Ive made.

Owen, Dr. Inanici and Knoernschild discuss research data and electrical stimulation levels for the study. 2018 photo by Marcus Donner

What advice would you give to those considering enrolling in study similar to this one? (Read this UW News article for a more complete description of the study.)

Honestly, I would say to do it. Theres no downside to this. It seems that the side effects are so minimal. I had super success with it, but even if you dont, youre not going to get worse. This is a huge opportunity, and its simple, its easy, and it doesnt take a lot of time to set up.

Do you have any closing thoughts?

Im really honored to be in a room with such hardworking and smart and dedicated individuals who are willing to spend time in their careers to make peoples lives better, and you do. You made a big impact on my life and how I get to live. Im really grateful for the work that you do, and Im happy to help. I really hope that this technology expands and becomes available to everyone and that we continue to take this as a stepping-stone and go even further with it.

Learn more about Owens personal experience in the research study in this article. More information about the study is available at UW News, on the Restorative Technologies website and in this associated research paper.

Continue reading here:

The impact of neurotechnology | UW Department of ...

Global Neurotechnology Market: Overview

Neurotechnology is defined as any technological innovation that allows the study or intervention into neurological processes. The nervous system controls every aspect of human biology, and helps it experience every nuance of the environment. Any disruption in this process can be dangerous for an individual. Hence, neurological study and intervention are necessary to alleviate the symptoms of such individuals and to further scientific study into the complex processes of the brain. It encompasses all such infrastructure, whether hardware or software that helps achieve this.

A major use of such technology is aiding treatment of chronic neurological disorders. Also, a recent interest into workings of the brain for enhancement of daily life is noted. This, as per Transparency Market Research, is set to drive the neurotechnology market forward from 2020 to 2030.

Request for Brochure-

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=B&rep_id=78592

Global Neurotechnology Market: Competitive Landscape

The global neurotechnology market is fragmented owing to the presence of a number of innovators and manufactures. These players are merging with various digital platforms and online service providers to increase outreach and capitalize on rising interest in this market.

Some of the notable players are:

Request for Analysis of COVID19 Impact on Neurotechnology Market

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=covid19&rep_id=78592

Global Neurotechnology Market: Key Trends and Drivers

A number of notable factors are lining the landscape of global neurotechnology market over the forecast period. As per Transparency market Research, these are propelling the market upward and forward. From the list of trends and drivers that are positively impacting growth in global neurotechnology market, prominent ones have been identified and some of them have been detailed out below:

Pre book Neurotechnology Market Report

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/checkout.php?rep_id=78592&ltype=S

Global Neurotechnology Market: Regional Analysis

North America and Europe are currently global leaders in the neurotechnology market owing to presence of robust technological infrastructure and world leading research facilities that make use of advanced machines to implement neurological research. As 1 in 4 persons in these regions would be aged 65 or above 65 by 2050 according to the World Health Organization, demand for neurotechnology is expected to steadily increase in these regions.

The Asia Pacific (APAC) region is expected to register the fastest growth in the neurotechnology market in the coming years. As governments in the region give impetus to research and healthcare development, demand for advanced machines to implement these plans will give a boost to this market.

Browse more Market Reports:

Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin Market:

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/subcutaneous-immunoglobulin-market.html

Human Microbiome Market:

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/human-microbiome-market.html

Foot Orthotic Insoles Market:

https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/foot-orthotic-insoles-market.html

About Us

Transparency Market Research is a global market intelligence company providing global business information reports and services. Our exclusive blend of quantitative forecasting and trends analysis provides forward-looking insight for several decision makers. Our experienced team of analysts, researchers, and consultants use proprietary data sources and various tools and techniques to gather and analyze information.

Our data repository is continuously updated and revised by a team of research experts so that it always reflects latest trends and information. With a broad research and analysis capability, Transparency Market Research employs rigorous primary and secondary research techniques in developing distinctive data sets and research material for business reports.

Contact

Transparency Market Research,

90 State Street, Suite 700,

Albany, NY 12207

Tel: +1-518-618-1030

USA Canada Toll Free: 866-552-3453

Website: https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/

Read more here:

Neurotechnology Market set to witness surge in demand over the forecast period of 2018-2026 KSU | The Sentinel Newspaper - KSU | The Sentinel...

New technology has enabled a partially paralyzed person to better control a robotic limb by feeding back what the robot can "feel" to the person's brain.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - A huge breakthrough in technology has allowed a partially paralyzed person actually feel what a robotic arm is touching, paving the way for a potential revolution in prosthetics!

The University of Pittsburgh collaborated with Blackrock in what will go down as a significant milestone in neurotechnology.

"It's the first time a BCI for a robotic prosthetic hand has integrated motion commands and touch in real time," according to Wired. BCI stands for brain-computer interface and is essentially the go-between program for paralyzed individuals who are controlling robotic limbs.

Nathan Copeland, the subject in the study who suffers from partial paralysis due to a car accident, was able to double his speed as he used the robotic arm once he was given the artificial tactile (touch) feedback and able to feel what the robot was feeling.

This is an incredible development, as robotic limbs have been controlled through sight up to this point.

Copeland was selected for the test because of his very specific type of injury. He still had some existing nerves, though messages from those nerves couldn't reach his brain correctly. The team mapped what parts of his brain still responded to touch, and recorded what happened in his brain when he imagined different movements.

The team then used Blackrock Neurotech's NeuroPort System and implanted four-micro electrode arrays into Copeland's brain two to read the signals for movement, and two to send signals to his sensory system.

Once Copeland learned how control the robotic limb with just sight feedback, the team switched on the feature that made his brain feel what the robot did, and it changed everything instantly.

One of the study's authors, biomedical engineer Jennifer Collinger, said, "you don't necessarily rely on vision for a lot of the things that you do. When you're interacting with objects, you rely on your sense of touch."

By placing sensors on the fingertips of the robotic arm and hand, as well as torque sensors on the fingers to relay pressure, whatever the robot feels was sent back as electrical impulses to Copeland's brain, allowing him to feel those pressures in his fingers and hands.

"The first time we did it, I was like, magically better somehow," Copeland said of his experience with artificial touch. He could also complete his tasks twice as fast because he didn't have to double-check visually what he could feel.

Having just published their study in Science, the team is still working out kinks in the system, such as making the sensations that Copeland feels a bit more natural. He might feel a poking sensation when it should be more of a rubbing one, for example.

The system is also wired, and requires being plugged into the sensors embedded in his skull. Once a way is made for him to be able to operate the arm outside the lab, then his life could be opened up to countless other tasks.

Copeland's successes are drawing so much attention that he was able to sell a picture of a cat he drew with his robotic arm recently.

View original post here:

Brain chip developed by University of Pittsburgh and Neurotech gives paralyzed man the ability to feel what a robotic arm touches! - TAG24 NEWS

This report studies the Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR market in many aspects of the industry such as market size, market conditions, market trends and forecasts, and the report also provides brief information on competitors and specific growth opportunities with key market drivers. To provide, find complete Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR market analysis segmented by company, region, type and application in the report.

The report provides regional analysis and valuable insights into the progress of the Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR market and approaches related to the Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR market. The report talks about the dominant aspects of the market and examines each segment.

Top Companies in the Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR Market- Fulcrum Biometrics, Delaney Secure Ltd., Neurotechnology, 360 Biometrics, AKSA Solution Development, AutoStar Technologies, Bayometric, Bromba Biometrics, California Peripherals and Components, Digital Data Systems, DYDEX-HS, Eyenetwatch and other.

(Exclusive Offer: Flat 25% discount on this report)

Get a Free sample copy of the Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR market report

https://www.marketinsightsreports.com/reports/10302408993/global-and-china-fingerprint-biometrics-in-the-var-market-size-status-and-forecast-2020-2026/inquiry?mode=126

1.Company Profile

Segment by Type

Non-AFIS Biometrics in VAR

AFIS Biometrics in VAR

Segment by Application

Commercial

Household

Others

Read Full Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR Market Report (Description, TOC, List of Tables & Figures, and Many More) at:

https://www.marketinsightsreports.com/reports/10302408993/global-and-china-fingerprint-biometrics-in-the-var-market-size-status-and-forecast-2020-2026?mode=126

Geographic Coverage-The report contains detailed country-level analysis, market revenue, market value and forecast analysis of ingestion, revenue and Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR Market share, growth speed, historical and forecast (2015-2026) of these regions are covered:

-North America (the United States, Canada, and Mexico)

-Europe (Germany, France, UK, Russia, and Italy)

-Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India, and Southeast Asia)

-South America (Brazil, Argentina, etc.)

-Middle East & Africa (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa)

The current market situations and prospects of the sector also have been examined. Additionally, prime strategical activities in the market, which include product developments, mergers, and acquisitions, partnerships, etc., are discussed. Company Coverage (Company Profile, Sales Revenue, Price, Gross Margin, Main Products, etc.)

Major Points Covered in Table of Contents:

Overview of Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR Market Global Market Status and Forecast by Regions Global Market Status and Forecast by Types Global Market Status and Forecast by Downstream Industry Market Driving Factor Analysis Market Competition Status by Major Manufacturers Major Manufacturers Introduction and Market Data Upstream and Downstream Market Analysis Cost and Gross Margin Analysis Marketing Status Analysis Market Report Conclusion Research Methodology and Reference

Key Questions Answered by Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR Market Report

We additionally offer customization on reports based on customer necessity:

1- Free Country-level analysis for any 5 countries of your choice.

2- Free Competitive analysis of any 5 key market players.

3- Free 40 analyst hours to cover any other data points.

About Us:

MarketInsightsReports provides syndicated market research on industry verticals including Healthcare, Information, and Communication Technology (ICT), Technology and Media, Chemicals, Materials, Energy, Heavy Industry, etc. MarketInsightsReports provides global and regional market intelligence coverage, a 360-degree market view which includes statistical forecasts, competitive landscape, detailed segmentation, key trends, and strategic recommendations.

Contact Us:

Irfan Tamboli (Head of Sales) Market Insights Reports

Phone: + 1704 266 3234 | +91-750-707-8687

sales@marketinsightsreports.com| irfan@marketinsightsreports.com

View original post here:

Fingerprint Biometrics in the VAR Market In-depth Profiling of Key Players and Recent Developments and Forecast Period to 2026|Fulcrum Biometrics,...