The fuzzy future

Now this blog is about, well, deafness and CIs. Almost makes it seem as if I am obsessed with both to exlusion of all else but I do have another life, and that includes work in knowledge transfer. So reading some of the latest software technologies being developed for CIs and other neuroprosthetic devices is full of interest - not least from that KT perspective.

So many of the new developments consist of work to take advantage of the explosion of analysis in so-called 'fuzzy logic', the invention of mathematicians seeking to deal with decision rules and 'truth' where the precision of predicate logic is absent. The simple example of a temperature control device here should explain all.

What might this do for all sorts of prosthetic devices? Well, one obvious outcome is to enable a less 'mechanical' functioning of devices; but it should also make them more efficient.

KT and neuroprosthetics

Unlikely as it seems my daily role in the University (directing across the institution all our work in knowledge transfer, through all aspects of commercialisation to spin-out and by every other conceivable route) seems to be benefitting from a closer acquaintance with the world of neuroprosthetics. Not only is my University's own Biomodelling Group doing fantastic work on deep brain modelling, which now actually means something real to me, but in casting around for ideas on how such work can more readily reach a market I've been impressed with the work of other UK colleagues looking for innovative ways of quickly taking this kind of technology from the lab to healthcare. The Strathclyde Institute of Medical Devices, for instance, doesn't leave the business of commercialisation via technology partnering to people like me - generalist knowledge transfer people with a broad understanding of transfer protocols, but for whom the industry and context would be new. Their approach appears to be to ensure that throughout the unit, whether dealing with studentships, small business liason or licensing, scientists with a commercial and sector background lead the process.

There is a trend in knowledge transfer toward greater specialisation, and that is almost certainly a part of the story in the UK academic neuroprosthetic knowledge transfer arena. More than that, however, there is a need to cope with the inherent uncertainty in the technological trajectory. The reality is that the speed of development in these technologies now depends upon work in nanotechnology (possibly, one day, even bionano), microelectronics, brain imaging, brain chemistry, neuropathology, computer science and materials science, which progress without a thought to that particular technological trajectory. Specialist knowledge transfer people will know how far firms are able now to capitalise upon the coincident developments in each of these areas. For all of us awaiting the development of more effective neuroprosthetic devices, we need their skills to lead that transfer from the lab to the operating theatre and beyond.