脑机接口：美国军事应用和意义初步评估（英文版）.pdf

ANIKA BINNENDIJK TIMOTHY MARLER ELIZABETH M. BARTELS U.S. MILITARY APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS BRAIN- COMPUTER INTERFACES AN INITIAL ASSESSMENT Cover design: Peter Soriano Cover image: Adobe Stock/Prostock-studio Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit rand/pubs/permissions.html. RANDs publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R is a registered trademark. For more information on this publication, visit rand/t/RR2996. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0523-4 Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation 3 Summary Brain-computer interface (BCI) represents an emerg- ing and potentially disruptive area of technology that, to date, has received minimal public discussion in the defense and national security policy commu- nities. This research considered key areas in which future BCI technologies might be relevant for the warfighters of tomorrow. It sought to explore the operational value of current and future developments regarding man-machine neural communication, the associated vulnerabilities and risks, and the policy levers that should be in place before the technology is deployed. The project drew from reviews of relevant tech- nical and security literature and discussions with subject-matter experts to develop a July 2018 game convening technical and operational experts. The game tested the potential utility of a functional “BCI toolbox” against two future tactical urban operations vignettes. Game results indicated that BCI tech- nologies are likely to have practical use on a future battlefield, particularly as the pace and volume of human-machine interaction intensify. Within the vignettes, participants anticipated that BCI capa- bilities could enhance the speed of communication, improve common situational awareness, and allow operators to control multiple technological platforms simultaneously. Participants noted that the pragmatic utility of each BCI capability would depend largely on its fidelity and reliability during combat. Of the capa- bilities assessed in the game, direct brain-to-brain communication facilitated by BCI appeared to offer the most transformative applications for operational use but also carried the most significant operational and institutional risks. Our analysis also explored possible areas of risk associated with the development and application of BCI combat capabilities. As with many new techno- logical developments, BCI may create new military operational vulnerabilities, new areas of ethical and legal risk, and potentially profound implications for existing military organizational structures. In particular, the report highlights potential operational vulnerabilities associated with the development and adoption of BCI technologies by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), including the potential for new points of failure, adversary access to new informa- tion, and new areas of exposure to harm or avenues of influence of service members. It also underscores institutional vulnerabilities that may arise, includ- ing challenges surrounding a deficit of trust in BCI technologies, as well as the potential erosion of unit cohesion, unit leadership, and other critical inter- personal military relationships. Finally, we consider potential future U.S. government ethical and legal responsibilities to an individual BCI operator, as well as the implications that BCI technologies might have on the ethical and legal responsibilities of that indi- vidual. These considerations should be incorporated into research and development (R few capabilities have been deployed commercially. However, it has the potential to be no less influential. With profound potential implications in fields from defense and national security to health and wellness, BCI may represent a highly disruptive technology that, to date, has received insufficient analysis. This report offers an initial assessment of what viable applications BCI may have in U.S. military operations, and what risks and vulnerabilities may be associated with its development and deployment. The authors describe the current state of the art and possible areas of technology development and growth for BCI military applications and investigate key questions associated with the use of BCI capabilities in a future combat scenario. Fundamentally, we ask, (1) what is the potential operational significance of current and future developments regarding BCI, and (2) what are the policy considerations necessary for effective management of the technology with an understanding of its potential impact on the warf- ighter of the future? Human-Machine Teaming The research views BCI in the context of the antic- ipated future of warfare, including increases in human-machine teaming. The analysis begins from the premise that human-machine teaming will play a major role in future combat and that BCI may provide a competitive advantage in future warfare. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work, who led DoDs 3rd offset, a catalyst for defense-sector technology development focused on human-machine teaming, summarized trends with military technol- ogy as follows: The coin of the realm during the Cold War was armored brigades, mechanized infan- try brigades, multiple launch rocket system battalions, self-propelled artillery battalions, tactical fighter squadrons, among others. Now, the coin of the realm is going to be learning machines and human-machine collaborations, which allows machines to allow humans to make better decisions; assisted human opera- tions, which means bringing the power of the network to the individual; human-machine combat teaming; and the autonomous network. 4 Although DoD R air- and water-based swarming unmanned vehicles; advanced electronic warfare (EW); integrated intel- ligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; situational awareness; and fires support. 116 In this vignette, the focus shifted from commu- nication to control over multiple platforms and medi- cal support. The additional consideration of plausible future military technologies highlighted new areas for potential human-machine interaction. While players did identify similar BCI technology as helping with command and control and intelligence, as in the first vignette, these warfighting functions were far less prominent in discussion. Instead, players placed more emphasis on the multiple platforms that needed to be coordinated to provide situational awareness, fire support, and medical evacuation capabilities. Players also noted that the more-open lines of sight in the vignette made air support and ground-based robots more useful, making direct control a more attractive option. The presence of an active casualty moved appli- cations of BCI to providing and monitoring medical care to a central focus. Building from a firsthand observation that “time is critical” when addressing urgent casualties, participants considered ways that BCI could improve response time. 117 One player suggested that transfer of advanced medical expertise through BCI could transform any combat medic into a surgeon, potentially reducing transport time to crit- ical care. Players paid particular attention to using human-machine decisionmaking to support the cor- rect allocation of resourcesfor example, determin- ing how much service member time should be spent providing medical care, or allocating unmanned systems to different tasks. Additional Use Cases Players also noted several additional areas where BCI would be helpful beyond the confines of the vignettes. For example, players discussed the utility of providing BCI to a mechanic, who could then draw on either machine learningbased diagnostics or the experience of a more senior technician when mak- ing repairs. Players felt that this would enable more capable support functions that, while not depicted directly in the vignette, would be key to maintain- ing forces over longer operations. Similarly, players mentioned that if there had been allies or partners operating alongside the vignette forces, BCI could be helpful in overcoming the language barrier to smooth communications. The short duration of the vignettes also minimized the role of cognitive and physical fatigue in player decisions. Players noted that poten- tial offensive applications of BCI were not included in the toolbox but could be useful. Players also noted that the opportunities for BCI in the operational management of the fight would likely be extensive but would be quite different from the tactical applica- tions that the game focused on. It is important to caveat that, while players felt BCI would be useful in the urban environment, they were quick to note that it would not be a panacea. In addition to the potential of BCI, the exercise also highlighted possible vulnerabilities, challenges, and risks created by the use of BCI. These are captured in detail in the following section. Summary of Game Findings While the insights of a single game should not be overstated, our BCI TTX contributed to an emergent discussion on BCI by identifying and considering tangible ways in which future BCI capabilities might contribute to combat operations. Participants chose BCI tools over traditional military approaches for tasks across the spectrum of warfighter functions. Of the seven BCI capabilities identified in the study, participants found the most uses across the two vignettes for three. First, participants prioritized BCI support to human-machine decisionmaking, antici- pating the benefits from the integration of informa- tion from many sources during a chaotic battle or the acceleration of decisionmaking during combat. 21 Second, direct systems control through BCI could offer combatants hands-free control of semiautono- mous systems and drone swarms. Third, enhanced physical performance would offer improved audi- tory and visual capabilities, or more fluid control of exoskeletons. Participants noted that utility of this function may become particularly pronounced once technology for military applications of AI and robotics develops further, improving the fidelity and reliability of BCI tools, and once adversaries have access to these capabilities. Further analysis of these three capabilities could further refine their uses and associated risks. Our participants noted that future direct brain-to-brain communication among service members, while requiring more advanced technology than may be available in the 2040 time frame, could be revolutionary in allowing a team to coordinate actions while clearing a building. The discussion also suggested that the technologies might pose increased risks of adversary exploitation and would have the greatest impact on current military organizational structures, depending on whether the capability can be turned off and used selectively. Many of the chal- lenges identified in the game highlighted the likely future amplification of cybersecurity risks by the use of BCI. Our Red team underscored the potential vul- nerabilities associated with hacking, denial of service, and EW. Potential Risks Analysts of emerging military innovation often note the need for caution surrounding the capability-vulnerability paradox, whereby new advantages can introduce new vulnerabilities. 118 The introduction of any new technology may present new challenges, risks, and vulnerabilities. Thus, in addi- tion to considering the operational utility of future BCI technologies in combat, this project sought to consider how the unique attributes of BCI might present new considerations for DoD and to identify core areas for further examination. Some of these considerations were derived from existing literature; most were drawn from discussions that were held in preparation for and during the BCI TTX, including insights from a Red team dedicated to identifying BCI-related vulnerabilities. While the game con- firmed the potential usefulness of BCI technolo- gies on the battlefield, it also highlighted potential risks. With respect to policy, the value proposition certainly suggests continued investment and devel- opment, but the risks highlight key areas where poli- cymakers should be proactive. This section considers potential operational vulnerabilities, institutional vulnerabilities, and ethical and legal risks, all associ- ated with combat applications of BCI technologies. Operational Vulnerabilities A Red team analysis of game-player decisions helped identify ways in which BCI technology could create new vulnerabilities for the future warfighter. To scope the analysis, game facilitators sought to distin- guish between new vulnerabilities specifically associ- ated with future BCI capabilities and those associated with greater future reliance on technology in general. Participants generally agreed that within each new area of vulnerability, the extent of the vulnerability would depend on both the reliance on BCI technol- ogy and specific features of the technology itself. Analysts of emerging military innovation often note the need for caution surrounding the capability-vulnerability paradox, whereby new advantages can introduce new vulnerabilities. 22 New Potential Points of Failure One major area of vulnerability was that reliance on BCI use could present new ways for an adversary to deny access to the technology, potentially rendering a unit less effective. A 2014 examination of synthetic telepathy concludes that “brain-to-brain communica- tion over the Internet may never be the best solution for the battlefield, despite the millions of dollars of Pentagon research money thats gone into exploring it.” 119 This may be due in part to the potential for service denial. The security of the network among brains, or between brains and machinesand net- work vulnerability to electromagnetic pulsewould thus be of paramount importance as EW attacks began. In fact, this issue arises outside the field of BCI as interests in secure networked communication on the battlefield increase. Overreliance on new mediums of transmis- sion could be problematic for any new technology, including future battlefields driven by the IoT, and maintaining communication channels is likely to be a priority. However, BCI could present a particular vulnerability because of its technical reliance on detecting very weak electrical signals. In a battlefield situation, these weak signals could pote