raymond.nelson wrote on Jan 16^th, 2008 at 11:02pm:

This point determines whether we are having a credible discussion about the empirical basis for polygraph testing, or simply engaging in some straw-man discussion about a mythical and inaccurate understanding of the test. Words themselves cannot be measured (at least in the way you are implying regarding polygraph tests). Response to stimulus can be measured and understood. The term "lie detector" is simply a term of convenience, not an accurate or empirical description. Epistemological complications aside, discussions about speaking the truth are a distraction from measurable concerns about behavior. r

I'm afraid that several others on this forum are quite correct Raymond.
Bullshit covered in high falutin' techno-babble is still bullshit.
You can make up as many multi-sylabbled words for the polygraph as your technical dictionary allows - but ultimately that is not going to transform a con-job into a scientific test.