Add Poll
Options: Text Color Split Pie
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align

Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
Topic Summary - Displaying 4 post(s).
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jan 8th, 2002 at 3:42am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Bob Park of the American Physical Society writes the following in the 4 January 2002 installment of his What's New column:

The system is supposed to scan the faces of passengers at the check- in counter with a high-definition thermal imaging camera while they answer questions. The claim is that blood rushes to the eye area when people lie. That may be, but your face will also flush when you run three miles from Concourse A to Concourse F, only to find the gate has been changed. On the other hand, you may turn pale if you see fuses dangling from another passenger's shoes. In short, it will work as well as a polygraph, which is not at all.

Posted by: G Scalabr
Posted on: Jan 7th, 2002 at 9:17pm
  Mark & Quote
Yes, this device does indeed seem to be plagued with the same problems as polygraphy. Most importantly, the "base rate" problem would make it completely useless in an airport setting.

Iím going to be generous and estimate that the base rate of terrorists to legitimate passengers is 1 per 1,000,000. The UPI article reports that the device is 80 percent accurate. This means that the "test" is 80/20 (percentages) with liars and 80/20 with truthful people. When that one terrorist comes through, there will be an 80% chance that he will set it off. On the other hand, 200,000 truthful people will be falsely accused. So for every terrorist that comes through, we still have to pick him out of the 200,000 innocent people who have also set the device off. Thus, the chance of catching a terrorist with this test (its predictive validity) would be .0005 (or 5/1000 of a percent). On the other hand, I could simply declare everyone truthful and my prediction would be 99.9995 accurate.

As Fred F said in another thread, all this device would do in airports is create chaos.
Posted by: beech trees
Posted on: Jan 7th, 2002 at 7:57pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
But, George. . . 

We know this new technology is accurate because they verified their results with polygraphs! †Wink
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jan 7th, 2002 at 6:51pm
  Mark & Quote
The Mayo Clinic of Rochester, Minnesota has posted a news release titled New Technology Detects Lying, Paves Way for Increased Security on attempts to detect lying through the use of thermal imaging technology. This research was led by Dr. James Levine of the Mayo Clinic with the participation of Norman L. Eberhardt, also of the Mayo Clinic, and Ioannis Pavlidis of Honeywell Laboratories.

The Mayo Clinic website also includes a link to a second page with video and audio files about Dr. Levine's research.

A "brief communication" about this research was published in the 3 January 2002 issue of Nature under the title, "Human behaviour: Seeing through the face of deception."

It seems to me that Dr. Levine has drawn conclusions that go far beyond the evidence of his research. For example, his thermal imaging camera did not detect "lying," as the Mayo Clinic news release claims. Rather, lying was inferred based on increased temperature of the eye sockets. This technique seems likely to be beset with the same problems as polygraphy.