ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all I thank God Almighty for His abundant grace and mercy which enabled me in the
finalization of this seminar.
I am grateful to Dr. R Sathikumar, Principal, Rajadhani Institute of Engineering &
Technology, Nagaroor, Attingal for providing me the best facilities and atmosphere for the
development and implementation of my seminar.
I thank Prof. Christin Markose, Head of Department of Electronics and Communication
Engineering for her encouragement and support.
I am indebted to Mrs.Suchithra, Assistant Professor of the Department of Electronics and
Communication Engineering for her invaluable suggestions and ideas without which this
seminar would have been but a dream.
My acknowledgement will not be completed without expressing gratitude to my beloved
parents and friends, who have been pillars of support and constant encouragement throughout
the course of this seminar.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER
NO.

TITLE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

LIST OF FIGURES

iv

LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

ABSTRACT

vi

INTRODUCTION

1.1.

DEFINITION

1.2.

TECHNIQUE

ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY

2.1.

SOURCES OF EEG ACTIVITIES

2.2.

EEG vs FMRI & PET

2.3.

METHOD

ROLE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

3.1.

PHASE 1: INVESTIGATION

3.2.

PHASE
SUBJECT

PAGE
NO.

2:

INTERVIEW

9
OF

3.3.

PHASE 3: SCIENTIFIC TESTING

3.4.

PHASE4: ADJUDICATION

THE

9
10
11
12

ROLE IN LEGAL PROCEEDING

15

5
CURRENT USES AND APPLICATION
5.1 COUNTER TERRORISM
2

15
17

5.2 CRIMINAL JUSTICE

17

5.3 MEDICAL FIELD

18

5.4.

ADVERTISING APPLICATIONS

5.5.

OTHER APPLICATIONS

LIMITATIONS

19
20
22

7
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES

LIST OF FIGURES

FIG NO.

TITLE

PAGE NO.

1.1

Waves to detect guilt

2.1

Electrography

2.2

Adaptive noise module

4.1

Wave for guilty

13

5.1

Medical treatment

18

LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

DNA Deoxy ribonucleic acid

EEG Electroencephalography
FMRI Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
MEG Magneto-encephalography
MERMER Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response

PET Positron Emission Tomography

SPECT Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography

ABSTRACT
Brain fingerprinting is based on finding that the brain generates a
unique brain wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus Use of
functional magnetic resonance imaging in lie detection derives from studies
suggesting that persons asked to lie show different patterns of brain activity than
they do when being truthful. Issues related to the use of such evidence in courts
are discussed. The author concludes that neither approach is currently supported
by enough data regarding its accuracy in detecting deception to warrant use in
court.
In the field of criminology, a new lie detector has been developed
in the United States of America. This is called brain fingerprinting. This
invention is supposed to be the best lie detector available as on date and is said
to detect even smooth criminals who pass the polygraph test (the conventional
lie detector test) with ease. The new method employs brain waves, which are
useful in detecting whether the person subjected to the test, remembers finer
details of the crime. Even if the person willingly suppresses the necessary
information, the brain wave is sure to trap him, according to the experts, who
are very excited about the new kid on the block.