BEOS: India's controversial mind-reading crime solution
Our memory can betray us, revealing whether we have committed a crime. Indian law enforcement officials have an unusual and controversial solution at their disposal. BEOS allows for extracting memories from the suspects' minds—those that the subjects might not want to share.
In 2021, a 20-year-old Indian resident named Surjaram was accused by a teenage student of assault. The incident allegedly occurred in a school classroom, where the teenager—according to her account—was lured and threatened with a knife. The girl informed her family about what happened and gave statements to the police.
Despite the gravity of the accusations, Surjaram was released from police custody on bail. As reported by Jonathan Moens, who describes the entire story and the technical solutions behind it in detail for Science, Surjaram's release was determined by three tests conducted at the request of the suspect, who denied the allegations.
His truthfulness was checked using a polygraph and a "truth serum"—administered in the form of barbiturate injections, which are thought to increase the chances of obtaining truthful information during interrogation.
Applications of electroencephalography
The third tool used to verify the suspect's credibility was BEOS (Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature Profiling). This is a non-invasive method for checking brain activity, utilizing electroencephalography (EEG), widely used in medicine.
Using electrodes attached to the head, it's possible to examine brain activity by detecting changes in electrical potential on the skin's surface. This method is employed in diagnosing conditions like seizure disorders, memory loss, fainting spells, vision disorders, and other neurological issues.
The P300 wave
EEG also allows for the detection of the P300 wave. This is a characteristic, measurable brain response to familiar or previously processed information. Research on the P300 wave has been ongoing since the 1960s and initially served primarily for diagnosing cognitive disorders.
This specific brain reaction can also be used to detect information in a person's memory that they might not want to disclose. In the 1980s, research into so-called brain fingerprints and lie detection based on brain activity was conducted at Harvard University by Dr. Lawrence Farwell.
The result of the research is a pattern of brain response called P300-MERMER (Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response): several hundred milliseconds after recognizing a stimulus, a positive P300 wave occurs, followed by a negative wave about 1.2 seconds later. This setup is clearly visible on brain activity graphs.
This research attracted the attention of U.S. security agencies, but in the early 21st century, organizations like the FBI and CIA rejected Dr. Farwell's method as not very useful. However, Pakistan viewed it differently, and its authorities collaborated with the scientist.
BEOS reveals hidden memories
Based on these discoveries, a neurobiologist at the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences in Bangalore, Prof. Champadi Raman Mukundan, developed the BEOS procedure. According to its creator, it is possible to distinguish reactions to events known indirectly—e.g., from rumors or news—from reactions that refer to events in which the subject participated.
As a result, BEOS can act not just as a lie detector but also work by exposing the brain to a suitably selected set of stimuli to force the person tested to reveal memories they do not want to share. The Indian justice system has already used this technology at least 700 times. The development and promotion of the BEOS method—even beyond India—is undertaken by the company Axxonet, founded by Prof. Mukundan.
BEOS - controversies and criticism
The issue with BEOS is that it raises many controversies. Critics argue that the difference between memories related to events someone participated in and those formed by imagination is too subtle or impossible to distinguish accurately.
This raises questions about the method's reliability and, consequently, its usage. Moreover, even experiments conducted by Axxonet have shown that it can produce about 5% false positives, suggesting connections to crimes for individuals who were uninvolved.
As a result, as far back as 2010, the Indian Supreme Court banned the use of the BEOS method without the consent of the subject and limited the utilization of evidence collected this way during a trial. Despite the criticism, BEOS continues to be used in India, and its supporters promote the method as an alternative to police torture, aiming to make the Indian justice system "more humane."
