The world's leading source of technology news and analysis
Search Spectrum IEEEXplore Digital Library Submit
Font Size: A A A
IEEE
Home [Alt + 1] Magazine [Alt + 2] Bioengineering [Alt + 3] Computing [Alt + 4] Consumer [Alt + 5] Power/Energy [Alt + 6] Semiconductors [Alt + 7] Communications [Alt + 8] Transportation [Alt + 9]

Loser: Tongue Vision Continued By Sandra Upson

First Published January 2007
emailEmail PrintPrint CommentsComments ()  ReprintsReprints NewslettersNewsletters

Photo: wicab

The concept of translating the visual world into sensory stimulation is not at all outlandish. Many vision researchers are investigating ways to safely implant electrode arrays, either in the visual cortex or at some other point along the pathway from the retina to the cortex. The tongue, also, is not such an absurd location. Unlike the skin, it has a relatively constant amount of moisture on the surface, making the electrical signal less likely to fluctuate there than elsewhere on the body, where sweat and other moisture can change the skin’s conductivity. The tongue also has better resolution than most areas of skin, allowing the points on the electrode array to be clustered closely together.

Bach-y-Rita began researching the technique of sensory substitution in the 1960s. The idea is that over time the mind grows accustomed to the buzzes and stops attending to them consciously, perceiving them only in visual terms. His first major effort at replacing vision was a tactile vision substitution system (TVSS), which consisted of a camera and a panel of buzzing electrodes mounted on the back of a chair. The camera would scan an area and display the images as vibrations the user would feel on her back. “TVSS failed because it could only do the outline well—it lacked internal detail,” Tan says. “I suspect the BrainPort will suffer the same problem: the edge gets enhanced, but everything else is suppressed.”

Compare the BrainPort to a similar device, the Optacon, a relatively popular tool in the 1970s and 1980s. A blind person would hold part of the Optacon under a finger to scan ordinary text, and pins in the device would vibrate in the shapes of letters. Initially, the device received excellent reviews, but it ultimately failed, because many users felt it was slow and had a difficult learning curve.

Another major factor is cost. Michael Wigle, an access ­technology specialist at the Cincinnati Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired, has found that Global Positioning System devices intended for the blind have struggled simply because they are too expensive, even though they can increase a person’s mobility by reciting directions and the names of nearby businesses. “You add a $1500 GPS device and they don’t have to ask someone what intersection this is,” Wigle says. “But you run into a lot of people asking themselves, ‘Am I willing to fork over that much money, or can I just swallow my pride?’ ”

What the Experts Say NICK TREDENNICK: This one is hopeless; $5000 to $6000 is way out of range for most blind people. Few are rich.

Even so, GPS has the advantage that it is a common technology needing only adaptive tweaks to assist the sightless. Advocates for the blind say prospective users generally favor devices that help them blend in with mainstream society, while tending to shun anything that seems to be leading them into a cyborg realm.

Wigle adds that any technology costing more than $1000 will succeed only if its benefits are enormous and obvious. Many people with low or no vision already invest in assistive technologies such as PDAs that offer Braille-based e‑mail, word processing, and music players. At some point, though, people will have to choose among the available options, he says. The BrainPort or the PDA? The BrainPort or the GPS? And those choices dilute the number of users who will be interested in the BrainPort system, especially for the $5000 to $6000 that Wicab expects to charge per device.

The BrainPort is being developed for other applications, including low-light navigation for the military, and Wicab has also begun selling BrainPort devices in Europe and Canada to people with an impaired sense of balance.

In this application, the tongue array is attached to an ­accelerometer. The electrodes transmit buzzes corresponding to changes in the head’s tilt, to warn the user of an impending fall. Similar devices also address balance ­disorders by providing feedback to the brain, such as one that uses auditory cues and a waist belt that buzzes to reflect changes in tilt. It isn’t clear yet whether the BrainPort will emerge as the most elegant solution to balance disorders.

Meanwhile, Wicab claims the vision application is still a few years away. Most people contacted for this article said they could imagine some people happily using the device if Wicab does away with the cord. But the history, the logistical realities, and, not least, the many ­uncertainties that lie along the way make it a long shot.


« Previous Page 2 of 2
emailEmail PrintPrint CommentsComments ()  ReprintsReprints NewslettersNewsletters


WHITE PAPERS

Featured White papers:

More»

White papers:

      More»