Mind Reading and Writing: The Future of Neurotechnology
Open accessAbstract
Recent advances in neuroscience and technology have made it possible to record from large assemblies of neurons and to decode their activity to extract information. At the same time, available methods to stimulate the brain and influence ongoing processing are also rapidly expanding. These developments pave the way for advanced neurotechnological applications that directly read from, and write to, the human brain. While such technologies are still primarily used in restricted therapeutic contexts, this may change in the future once their performance has improved and they become more widely applicable. Here, we provide an overview of methods to interface with the brain, speculate about potential applications, and discuss important issues associated with a neurotechnologically assisted future.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Dynamic stimulation and dynamic current steering for visual cortical prosthetics build on earlier efforts to develop neural stimulation strategies for reading in neural information in human neuroprosthetics.
“Dynamic stimulation and dynamic current steering for VCPs also build on previous efforts to create optimal neural stimulation strategies in human neuroprosthetics which aim to ‘read in’ neural information (Roelfsema et al., 2018).”
From Dynamic Stimulation of Visual Cortex Produces Form Vision in Sighted and Blind Humans (2020) · cites this paper as Roelfsema et al., 2018
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 145 · Cited by 107
- Authors
- Roelfsema, P. R., Denys, D., & Klink, P. C.
- Affiliations
- Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Roelfsema, Pieter R.
- Venue
- Trends in Cognitive Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-07
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 598-610
- ISSN
- 1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2802937788
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 145
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 1.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- KNAW Research Portal (The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- European Research Council (339490)
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (451.13.023, 823-02-010)
- Horizon 2020 (7202070)
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
- Keywords
- brain-computer interface, neural decoding, neural recording, brain stimulation, neurotechnology, neuroprosthetics, therapeutic applications
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Brain, Consciousness, Humans, Mental Processes, Brain-Computer Interfaces
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
