A year ago, I discussed devices that can almost read our thought and our dreams. Today, I will talk about devices that advance (the science of?) lie detection. Dr. Hassan Ugail (Center for Visual Computing, Bradford University, UK) reported on one such device at the British Science Festival that ends on 15 September.
Dr. Ugail, who is working with the UK Border Agency, explained the system, which is comprised of a camera with a high resolution thermal imaging sensor that analyzes facial expressions. It is claimed that it can currently discriminate between truth and falsehood to about a 65% accuracy.
Compared to the polygraph (developed in 1921), this device is non-invasive and is claimed to be more accurate. But, the data to make that claim only exists for about 40 subjects, so it is still in the early stages. And, the researchers further claim that the tests have been in controlled environments, not those with high stress; they expect higher success ratios in those conditions (a logical assumption). The fact that both photographic and thermal imaging are fed into the algorithmic analysis is the reason they believe they will achieve the higher accuracy.
The thermal imaging system detects changes in blood flow to our skin, and the camera yields data on eye movements, pupil dilation, lip action among other vital signs. One of the prime regions it analyzes is the periorbital (area around the eye) region and the cheeks. In general, think “Lie to Me”, the (now-canceled) Fox TV show, starring Tim Roth.
Dr. Rosalind Picard (EE/Media Lab, MIT) has developed a different device; reading glasses (LED activated) that alert the user to what thoughts are being expressed. It’s accuracy is about 64%, about the same as Dr. Ugail’s device. This one uses a tiny camera that tracks 24 facial features, which are then compared to its database developed from six generalized facial expressions.
Either way, lie detection processes are about to be brought to the next level. Or, at least the authorities hope they are…
I want one of these devices for the next time I ask my husband, “Does this outfit make me look fat?” And I’m sure it will come in handy when my kids are just a little bit older! All kidding aside, 65% doesn’t seem that high to me, especially if used in crime situations. But I never knew the accuracy rate of the polygraph and somehow assumed it was higher than that. All fascinating technology. I must have a guilty conscience because the thought of having to undergo one of these tests would probably make my palms sweat! As always, very interesting!
Suerae:
You DO NOT! 🙂 And, if I were your husband, I’d run for the hills. But, then, again, I’m sure everything looks great for you…
The researchers are correct. The more stress we feel, the more our circulatory changes become evident.
And, I always thought sweaty palms meant something completely different….
Roy
Haha! It’s a good thing for you that they haven’t invented lie detectors that work across the internet! I have no idea what your sweaty palms mean and I’m pretty sure I don’t want to know. My sweaty palms mean the beginnings of either a panic attack or perhaps a hot flash. Maybe they should invent a palm meter to work alongside the photographic imaging?
You got it right, Suerae.
See, you didn’t even need a machine!!!
Roy
I didn’t realize lie detectors had accuracy rates lower than 65%. That is unnerving to think criminal cases hinge on that… so from that perspective anything moving closer to a higher accuracy is a great thing.
This reminds me of an episode of MythBusters where they were using brain scans to see if they could detect lies. It worked some of the time.
Suerae, I’m thinking I’d NOT want a lie detector for that one. My husband always answers with, “No” and I’m good with that. 😉
Michelle:
Thanks for the laugh! And, that’s the reason why polygraphs are not admissible in court!
Roy
Roy, aloha. Since 65% is not a passing grade, why do agencies press for people to take the test? Perhaps in the hopes that they will confess to whatever?
Quite honestly, Roy, if you were to hook me up right now and start asking me questions about my life, which I answered honestly, I think I would be so nervous or stressed, that it would look like I was lying. My mind would start playi8ng tricks on me and I would be second guessing.
Guess I’d better either behave myself or not get caught. What do you think? Aloha. Janet
I had to take a lie detector test twice. About half-way through the first one, I realized what the system really determined- our responses to our answers. It IS why these devices are not allowed to be used in a court of law. A cold-blooded killer, someone whose psyche was clearly divorced from reality, could easily pass those tests. If someone were practiced in meditation, I believe they could “zone out” their responses, as well.
It’s why Larry Farwell’s approach has been of interest for years (https://www.adjuvancy.com/wordpress/http:/www.adjuvancy.com/wordpress/can-your-read-my-mind-can-you-see-my-dreams/).
Thanks for your comments and astute observations. Who knows what questions I would love to ask you!
Roy
First of all, I loved “Lie to Me” and sad it’s not coming on anymore. It prompted my research into learning more about micro-expressions and challenge myself to see if I can recognize them (it’s not my gift!) LOL
I’ve always wanted to take a lie detector test and answer falsely to see if I could still pass. You just gave me an idea … *I’m adding this to my bucket list now* 🙂
~Kesha
Make sure you control the situation, Kesha!
I had to take a lie detector test and it was very stressful. (I knew I was telling the truth, but the contraption just induces tension.)
That’s why I think the non-invasive, non-contiguous devices may be more reliable. The data, however, belies that belief.
Roy
PS: I loved Lie to Me, as well!