First direct brain-to-brain interface between two animals
March 1, 2013

Researchers have electronically linked the brains of pairs of rats for the first time, enabling them to communicate directly to solve simple behavioral puzzles (credit: Duke University)
Researchers have electronically linked the brains of pairs of rats for the first time, enabling them to communicate directly to solve simple behavioral puzzles.
They even brain-linked two animals thousands of miles apart — one in Durham, North Carolina and one in Natal, Brazil.
The researchers think linking multiple brains could form the first “organic computer.”
“Our previous studies with brain-machine interfaces had convinced us that the brain was much more plastic than we had thought,” said Duke University Medical Center neurobiologist Miguel Nicolelis .
“In those experiments, the brain was able to adapt easily to accept input from devices outside the body and even learn how to process invisible infrared light generated by an artificial sensor.
“So, the question we asked was: if the brain could assimilate signals from artificial sensors, could it also assimilate information input from sensors from a different body?”
To find out, the researchers first trained pairs of rats to solve a simple problem — to press the correct lever when an indicator light above the lever switched on, to obtain a sip of water. They next connected the two animals’ brains via arrays of microelectrodes inserted into the area of the cortex that processes touch information.
One animal of the dyad was designated as the “encoder” animal. This animal received a visual cue that informed it which lever to press in exchange for a food pellet. Once this “encoder” rat pressed the right lever, a sample of its brain activity that coded its behavioral decision was translated into a pattern of electrical stimulation that was delivered directly into the brain of the second animal of the dyad, known as the “decoder” animal.
The decoder rat had the same types of levers in its chamber, but it did not receive any visual cue indicating which lever it should press to obtain a reward. So to press the correct lever and receive the reward it craved, the decoder rat would have to rely on the cue transmitted from the encoder via the brain-to-brain machine interface.
The researchers then conducted trials to determine how well the decoder animal could decipher the brain input from the encoder rat to choose the correct lever. The decoder rat ultimately achieved a maximum success rate of about 70 percent, only slightly below the possible maximum success rate of 78 percent that the researchers had theorized was achievable. This maximum rate was what the researchers found they could achieve when they were transmitting regular electrical signals directly to the decoder rat’s brain that were not generated by the encoder.
Importantly, the communication provided by this brain-to-brain interface (BTBI) was two-way. For instance, the encoder rat did not receive a full reward if the decoder rat made a wrong choice — a “behavioral collaboration” between the pair of rats.
“We saw that when the decoder rat committed an error, the encoder basically changed both its brain function and behavior to make it easier for its partner to get it right,” Nicolelis said. “The encoder improved the signal-to-noise ratio of its brain activity that represented the decision, so the signal became cleaner and easier to detect. And it made a quicker, cleaner decision to choose the correct lever to press.
“Invariably, when the encoder made those adaptations, the decoder got the right decision more often, so they both got a better reward.”
Remote brain-to-brain communication
To test the transmission limits of the brain-to-brain communication, the researchers placed an encoder rat in Brazil, at the Edmond and Lily Safra International Institute of Neuroscience of Natal (ELS-IINN), and transmitted its brain signals over the Internet to a decoder rat in Durham, North Carolina.
They found that the two rats could still work together on the tactile discrimination task.
“So, even though the animals were on different continents, with the resulting noisy transmission and signal delays, they could still communicate,” said Miguel Pais-Vieira, a postdoctoral fellow and first author of the study. “This tells us that we could create a workable, network of animal brains distributed in many different locations.”
Nicolelis concluded that “These experiments showed that we have established a sophisticated, direct communication linkage between brains, and that the decoder brain is working as a pattern-recognition device. So basically, we are creating what I call an organic computer. Such a computer solves a puzzle in a ‘non-Turing’ way,” he said. A “Turing machine” is the classical model for a computer, in which a computer operates on data using a set of predetermined instructions — also known as an algorithm — to arrive at a solution.
“But in this case, we are not inputting instructions, but rather only a signal that represents a decision made by the encoder, which is transmitted to the decoder’s brain which has to figure out how to solve the puzzle. So, we are creating a single central nervous system made up of two rat brains.”
Brain-net and mind-swapping
Nicolelis pointed out that, in theory, such a system is not limited to a pair of brains, but instead could include a network of brains, which he named a “brain-net.” Researchers at Duke and at the ELS-IINN are now working on experiments to link multiple animals cooperatively to solve more complex behavioral tasks.
Nicolelis first introduced the concept of a “brain-net” in his book Beyond Boundaries: The New Neuroscience of Connecting Brains with Machines — and How it Will Change Our Lives.
“We cannot even predict what kinds of emergent properties would appear when animals begin interacting as part of a brain-net. In theory, you could imagine that a combination of brains could provide solutions that individual brains cannot achieve by themselves.” Such a connection might even mean that one animal would incorporate another’s sense of “self,” he said.
This was suggested in a second set of experiments in which the researchers trained pairs of rats to distinguish between a narrow or wide opening using their whiskers. “Our studies of the sensory cortex of the decoder rats in these experiments showed that the decoder’s brain began to represent in its tactile cortex not only its own whiskers, but the encoder rat’s whiskers, too.
“We detected cortical neurons that responded to both sets of whiskers, which means that the rat created a second representation of a second body on top of its own.”
Recording 30,000 neurons simultaneously
Basic studies of such adaptations could lead to a new field that Nicolelis calls the “neurophysiology of social interaction.” “To understand social interaction, we could record from animals’ brains while they are socializing and analyze how their brains adapt — for example when a new member of the colony is introduced,” he said.
Such complex experiments will be enabled by the laboratory’s ability, announced last December, to record brain signals from almost 2,000 brain cells at once, an unprecedented number said Nicolelis. Ultimately, the researchers hope to record the electrical activity produced simultaneously by 10–30,000 cortical neurons in the next five years — which could be useful for the Brain Activity Map project.
Such massive brain recordings will enable more precise control of motor neuroprostheses — such as those being developed by the Walk Again Project — to restore motor control to paralyzed people, Nicolelis said. This projefct recently received a $20 million grant from FINEP, a Brazilian research funding agency, to allow the development of the first brain-controlled whole-body exoskeleton aimed at restoring mobility in severely paralyzed patients. A first demonstration of this technology is expected to happen in the opening game of the 2014 Soccer World Cup in Brazil.
Nicolelis and colleagues published their findings in the February 28, 2013, issue of the open-access journal Scientific Reports.
Nicolelis is a professor of neurobiology, biomedical engineering, and psychology and neuroscience, and co-director of the Center for Neuroengineering. More information: Nicolelis Lab.
Is a rat Singularity near? :) — Editor
A Brain-to-Brain Interface for Real-Time Sharing of Sensorimotor Information. The movie sequence depicts a dyad of rats transferring cortical motor information via the brain-to-brain interface. The yellow circle indicates the correct choice in each behavioral chamber. The audio track is the spiking activity of an ensemble of M1 neurons. Immediately after the encoder’s reward, a pattern of ICMS is delivered to the decoder rat’s primary motor cortex. Note that, after the decoder makes a correct lever response, the encoder rat is rewarded for the second time during the course of a single trial.
Dr. Miguel Nicolelis Explains Brain to Brain Interface Study

Comments (62)
by Marya Miller
So now you’re enabling rats to take over the world?
by Giulio Prisco
According to Douglas Adams, rats have always owned the world !
by Sean Brazell
They need to build portable versions of this system, send it to all those various scientific conferences, hook all those minds up, see what happens.
by Bri
They would look very strange with all those wires coming out of their heads. There is an interesting video that comes up as one of the voices after this one is done. Baby Nicholas was born without a brain. He has only a brain stem. They say he will die soon but he has lived to his second birthday so far. He can’t hear or see but they say he can tell if he is being held. He looks like a relatively normal baby. Makes you wonder where consciousness really is.
by Bri
I’m going a little off topic here. The video I saw that comes up as a choice after the posted video was of a child born without a brain. It happens from time to time including babies born with mainly cerebral fluid and small amounts of brain matter. They usually die. This baby has beaten the odds and survived till two years old. It can’t hear or see or process the world around it but it’s alive. It might as well be a sea sponge or a tree. They don’t have brains. In the future we could fix this child and it would develope normally. In the future we could give trees and sea sponges brains
What is life? What is consciousness? There is no pulvinare directing attention yet the baby doesn’t look that much defferent from any other two year old. Life, consciousness, the I Am is everywhere. We just force it into our preconceived notions.
by alvaro
towards a collective inteligence
by Mike
This sounds cool, but did the decoder rat really act on a signal? It looked to me like he pressed BOTH levers, and the 2 rats got the reward after he pressed the 2nd one.
by GAUSS
So what happens when you link two or more PhDs in a given field? Or better yet, from distinct fields? Could they muddle through the initial chaos/confusion and collaborate mentally?
by Neo
wow we can link 2 brains together! not science fiction. science fact.
by ChrisF
“Such a computer solves a puzzle in a non-Turing way” – what a lot of old waffle. Just because a system is too complicated for us to discern what it’s doing, doesn’t say anything about whether it’s doing Turing computation or not. I mean, or the researchers seriously making the claim that they’re doing something a simple desktop PC can’t (in theory) do ?
Has this experiment really demonstrated anything valuable ? I don’t see that it has taught us anything about how thoughts are encoded at a neuronal level. You might just have well have connected the two rats’ whisker’s via a long piece of string – doesn’t that achieve the same end result ?
This whole experiment makes me feel quite queasy. Rats are sentient creatures that are very likely to experience many of the same emotions we do. They enjoy playing with one another and are even known to “giggle” when they’re tickled ! I am quite happy for the researches to drill holes in their own skulls if they wish to, but why inflict this treatment on helpless lab animals ?
by Gabriel
Chris….It’s something I feel that needs to be come to terms with – you are right in that rats are conscious beings: not as conscious as humans, of course, but conscious all the same…I know it seems horrible to treat them as the ‘lab rats’ they are, but it’s rationalized by the benefits that we gain — newer and newer insights and results that can eventually be translated into humans. Rats supposedly share much of our genes, which is why they are used so much…how much righteous do you’ll think they’ll be when we are able to greatly reverse aging in them? They may not have asked for it, no, but it will go a long way in being able to do it in human beings.
We conquer and master nature, it’s what we do…so naturally, it often comes at the expense of nature – it’s a contentious issue that never really stops: as an animal lover, I often stand by in defense of flora and fauna…and I know rationalizing human progress in expense of nature, can seem more then harsh…really, I’m not sure it’s something that will ever be put to rest until humans are capable and self-sufficient enough to progress without taking advantage of nature like this, which I don’t think will happen for quite awhile…not until, as some here will say, until the Singularity. In-Vitro meat for example, will enable us to no longer kill lifestock and such practices, in time, will be seen as barbaric and savage, as many of the things we do now.
by Giulia
You should listen to Radiolab’s podcast on the laughing rats (or maybe it was mice, but same thing).
by Thrillhouse
>Just because a system is too complicated for us to discern what it’s doing, doesn’t say anything about whether it’s doing Turing computation or not.
My understanding of what they meant by that was that a hypothetical “rat king” organic brain connected hive mind would not be manipulating symbols according to a set of rules, but would simply be doing what organic brains already do (whatever that is), only with far more interconnected neurons. If you can get all those neurons working together like one super-brain, who knows what you can get? At the very least it would bypass the Chinese Room argument entirely (however strong you feel that argument is).
>Has this experiment really demonstrated anything valuable ? I don’t see that it has taught us anything about how thoughts are encoded at a neuronal level. You might just have well have connected the two rats’ whisker’s via a long piece of string – doesn’t that achieve the same end result ?
Is that really how you see it? I thought the experiment wasn’t about determining the nature of thoughts, but their transmissibility. Look at it this way – if two humans achieved telepathy without machines, would you scoff at the results for not “telling us anything about how thoughts are encoded”? The mindblowing factor is the fact that communication is possible, not the insight provided into what is being communicated.
>(animal cruelty)
Yes, that’s unfortunate. However, there are probably worse cases than this to be concerned about, which provide much less benefit to our understanding. At the very least, the rats were having a good time getting pellets instead of avoiding shocks or whatever.
by GAUSS
All hail the rat king!
by ChrisF
You make very good points, thanks Thrillhouse and Gabriel.
Generally, I don’t have a problem with animal research if it’s conducted humanely and if there’s some kind of potential ‘greater good’ outcome that outweighs any suffering. But in this case, I just don’t see that we’ve really learned anything useful. Brains compute using electrical impulses, so it’s no surprise that we can “wire up” two brains and pass signals back and forth (although it’s an impressive engineering feat). And it’s no surprise that each rat can change its behaviour in response to the new sensory input that it’s receiving. Overall this experiment just strikes me as a clumsy and gruesome “hack”… kind of like stitching together random body parts to try and reanimate a dead body !
Maybe I’m missing the significance. I agree that It’ll be fascinating if/when we can carry out these sorts of experiments on humans, perhaps linking up brain areas that store ‘higher-level’ concepts. And maybe this is a necessary first step. But the sooner we stop using creatures that can’t answer back or report what they’re experiencing, the happier I’ll be!
by Glen Lincoln
I can’t wait for this for sex! I’ll have instant feedback on my technique and be able to feel what my partner’s experiencing! Awesome! ; )
by Jason Adair
I can’t wait to plug, link into the human “brain-net” or better yet, my own personal AI companion. =o)
by GAUSS
I envision private cloud space with a set of “assistants” working with you to solve different problems, multitask, etc. Then switch them all off when you get home and just be *you*.
by Jason Adair
If I had an advanced personal AI companion, we would have endless conversations and philosophical debates, work on projects, make suggestions to each other. It would be my new best friend. My AI companion could prioritize and remind me of tasks I need to do, pressure me to finish them.
When AI companions become sufficiently advanced, they could connect to parts of your brain that affect senses and make you feel sensations or make you think that you are in different place. But also I fear that they could take control over your body. I think this could be a new idea for a science-fiction movie!
by Bri
I echo those thoughts.
by Jason Adair
Is there a way to get notified of when someone replies to a comment you post on this site? I have to come check and read though all the comments each time time it seems.
by Editor
Yes, thanks for the reminder. We’ll add that feature.
by GAUSS
That’d be spiffy, Editor! Thank you!
by Bri
How about a full log of posts. It could be a button on the top row so it doesn’t take up too much space. I particularly liked when there was the first few words to. It let you know the general kist of the post.
by Editor
Installed. Please let me know how it works for you.
by Jason Adair
Thank you! =oD
by GAUSS
There is so much great material in this here 21st century, it’s ridiculous. JJ Abrams will be busy forever.
by NANOBRAINS911
HOLY SMOKE!
by Peter the printer
I think rats are already aware as are all sentient creatures [my dog, for instance, is totally self-aware, has a sense of humour, plays jokes, enjoys jokes played on him, has desires and plans actions]. I can’t ignore the repugnance I feel at doing things like this to other species. IF it has any relevance to us, it should be tested on us, if it doesn’t or if we are considered ‘too different’ then there’s no point to it, unless the plan is to build computers using imobilised rats as components.
Something missing here; empathy. Other mammals are not components, they are living entities with their own minds; only a rat knows what it is to be rat, similarly, only a human knows what it is to be human. Bring in the philosophers, scientists aren’t trained in moral philosophy, which is why they become increasingly like the Nazi scientists who saw no limits to what they could do except their imagination.
Anyone else find this bothersome? Most seem to only see ‘benefits’ to us.
by Vin
Actually, why not link and even ‘cross-link specialist brain areas’ of individuals of not only the same species but even different species together, even humans and animals: since they are all evolved with specialist skills, the resulting networked brain could have the benefit of the best of each of them.
To know what it is like to fly like a bird or hear like a bat or swim like a fish, at the same time even? Linking and even cross-linking the best skills and senses of one subject to another, will result via feedback and plasticity to both attaining (up to a point) all the senses and skills of the ensemble, analogously at least? Or even something totally new from the mix.
But, as for empathy, It’s funny when you say it is missing because I guess it’s possible a time will come when researchers will be linked by the fruits of this project to their lab animals which is probably the best formula for nurturing empathy. Ironically, in a sense the researchers via this linking – like the animal welfare people are always suggesting – will be researching on themselves.
Within the parameters of the experiment, these rats did exhibit empathy (or rather their brains adapted nurtured by mutual reward of that cooperative behaviour which is essentially the same thing?).
To be honest, i’d rather link to animals than a lot of humans I know. It’s exciting but also scary, we definitely need a lot a discussion on it from everyone… maybe if we could link minds to discuss the ramifications of linking minds!
by ChrisF
Nicely put, Peter… I too find the idea of ‘organic computers’ to be quite disturbing. I dislike the idea of using animals as “machines” without any regard for their inner experiences and feelings (the same reason I avoid factory-farmed food and ultimately became vegetarian a couple of years ago).
When they arrive, I really hope the sentient AIs feel the same way. If it’s morally OK for us to conduct these experiments on rats, what argument can we make to prevent the AIs from using the same methods to study us ?
by Giulio Prisco
It seems surreal that this impressive result is released the day after a NYT article reported that some scientist consider large scale neuroscience projects like the (hopefully soon to be announced) Brain Activity Map “futile” (see http://www.kurzweilai.net/brain-activity-map-project-is-futile-say-some-scientists-others-enthused ).
In this field, we are really seeing exponential acceleration, every day of every week.
by Mority
impressive…
by Giulio Prisco
This seems an impressive milestone on the path to read/write brain interfaces
by Spotted Marley
@MatthewQ – I am sitting here just as stunned. This seems like a true catalyst discovery
by MatthewQ
Ya, my brain is racing but maybe I’m so excited at the moment it’s just spinning its wheels. All I can think about is that if they hook up Eric Clapton’s head to one of these he could make a lot of money selling guitar skills…
by Gorden Russell
That’s not what I was first thinking of, MatthewQ, but you’re right. Clapton could link up with just some of his fans and create a million guitar band.
by MatthewQ
LOL, the implications are seemingly limitless. You can get lost on any tangent of speculation with this thing. Imagine what it would do for jazz musicians and improvisation. I think my head is going to be hurting by the end of the day.
by Vin
I think it has the potential to bring all life on the planet that can spark a nerve together, with all their subtlety and variety, into one giant collaborative melting pot venture/lifeform? Like how about a physicist with the single mindedness of a shark smelling blood to generate new solutions in cosmology? I need a new jaw transplant soon number of times I keep dropping it reading articles on this site.
by Skydog
“HOLY SHIT!”
~Bluto Blutarsky
by Bri
Sounds like pinky and the brain have a chance at world dominance, though I think the brain might want another side kick.
by MatthewQ
Am I dreaming? Are we really so close?
by Editor
“Dude, is it my imagination, or are those rats monitoring us? They seem to be coordinated. And what are those antennas on their heads?” ….
by Starheart
“Come, Pinky, we must prepare for tomorrow night.”
“Why, Brain? What are we doing tomo… ah, of course! I sense you think to.. Try to take over the world!”
by Bri
Wow dude!!! My arm just moved by itself!!!!!
by Editor
Our remoteBri system seems to be working… we haven’t developed the autoparagraph code yet, though….
by Gorden Russell
“Is a rat Singularity near? :) — Editor”
Now that is what I was thinking of, Amara. Once you begin linking one rat dyad to another, it will lead to a rat sentience that will believe in the Monad. With the power of this linked mind, they will create their own rat god.
by Editor
I’m thinking cheese will be involved at some point ….
by Bri
Did you say cheese? That’s it. I’m done. It won’t be long till I don’t have a will of my own. Remotely piloted from afar. You would have to say cheese.
by Gorden Russell
Never mind the cheese. I know that rats will work real hard for dog food. Didn’t I tell you about my son’s pet rat who risked his life gathering nuggets of kibble?
by Ed
rat Borg, 1.0
by GAUSS
Gorden, I laughed for like 10 minutes when I read this.
by MatthewQ
You raise a very good point. The authors talk about building an organic computer using this method.
Ok…. We often speculate here on this forum about Hive Minds or Human Internet Hybrid Hyper Brains. What happens if you hook enough rats together and the overall thing becomes aware? Becomes more than computer? More even than a single human could be? Would it not be the height of irony if the first uplifted species on Earth were a bunch of rats?
It sounds like comedy but when you think about it… Unlike networking a bunch of computers with no underlying intuitive capacity- rats have problem solving ability. They are aware of themselves even if only on a small scale.
What would we do if this big networked ‘Organic Computer’ suddenly said ‘No, don’t unplug us… We need to have a talk about cats’? Exhilarating but a little frightening too. Like standing on the edge of a huge precipice.
by Gorden Russell
“Would it not be the height of irony if the first uplifted species on Earth were a bunch of rats?”
Right, Matthew! We gotta get this idea over to David Brin. He has a web site.
by MatthewQ
LOL, I had to wiki that. I must admit, the only David Brin book I’ve read is his non-fiction- The Transparent Society. It influenced my thinking quite a bit.
I just think it would be funny if we switched all these rats on and they turned out to have an IQ of 300 and our own uplifting depended on them- i.e. the rats raise the humans to transhuman status. I mean, could you imagine if the first A.I. was written by rats instead of humans?
by Gorden Russell
Oh well, rats are no more greedy than humans.
by MatthewQ
They need to try this with monkeys next.
by Heikos
Yes, that’s what I was thinking. Use like 50 chimpanzee’s with this tech and look where it will lead.
But, before we do that, could we please remove parts of their brains which cause aggression, egoism and alike? Should save us some problems.
Come to think of it: it does sound a bit like a “Colossus: The Forbin Project” alpha version.
by Bri
Skip mars and monkeys. I’m sure there would be a whole bunch of people who would volunteer for an expanded version of this experiment.
by MatthewQ
I’d be a volunteer. But I’d want to see the monkeys use it first.
by Joseph C.
Miguel Nicolelis says they are “perfecting the experiment” in monkeys, training them to collaborate in a virtual game.
http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/28/17123686-two-rats-thousands-of-miles-apart-cooperate-telepathically-via-brain-implant?lite
by Sea bass
I wonder how long it will take for the monkeys to write Shakespeare