comScore
Science Saturday, January 26th 2013 at 2:00 pm

DARPA’s Plan to Scan the Brains of Dogs Sounds Suspiciously Like Fallout

How do you pick the dogs that are chosen for military and law enforcement service? Training is an expensive proposition, so it’s in the best interest of everyone to only train those dogs that will do an excellent job. There’s nothing worse than a dud dog, even if that’s a thing I just made up. There’s still nothing worse than that. Thankfully, DARPA is looking into scanning the brains of dogs in order to determine which ones to train, which sounds an awful lot like something out of the Fallout universe.

DARPA believes that capturing images of the dogs’ brains while responding to specific handler cues could help weed out those that aren’t as reactive, to simplify it. Those that don’t skew towards specific tasks won’t ever be trained for that task. This should cut down on costs since the breeds used for these kind of tasks are very specific. Basically, it’d mean fewer failures and more successes.

It gets even better, though. The project’s titled Functional Imaging to Develop Outstanding Service-Dogs. That’s right. The plan to scan the brains of dogs in order to help determine if they’re going to be excellent for military and other tasks is called FIDOS. As if they weren’t already incredibly amusing, DARPA’s suddenly become a lot more so.

The plan’s still in research stage, so don’t expect to be hearing all about cool MRIs of dog brains at any point soon. Should it pan out, though, it would mean that training of dogs for therapy and other tasks would become a lot simpler. Fewer dud dogs is a winning proposition for everyone.

(DARPA via Wired, The Verge)

Relevant to your interests

Filed Under |
  • http://blog.coatesism.com/ Shaun M Coates

    How long until joining the military requires taking the ASVAB and getting a brain scan?

  • Anonymous

    I always thought a certain degree of brainlessness was a prerequisite for entry into a military(US, Canada’s, or UK’s…)?

  • http://twitter.com/MaryKateClark Marykate Clark

    A relationship is (at least) a two-way dynamic, so it’s not just the receptiveness of the dog that matters, but I suppose they’re compensating for the side they’ve been least able to fully assess.
    I wonder what their looking to find in the brain activity that indicates to them a suitable predisposition in a dog. But as every human being varies from one to the next, I imagine that a spectrum of suitable sorts of dogs must be preferable to some degree, rather than clones of one single dog and it’s personality, etc. I imagine that each functioning pair differs slightly from the next as each is a unique human teamed up with a compatible dog. It’s a complimentary relationship. The effectiveness of some of those partnerships might not just come down to the dog. Yet equally effective pairs, might not be identical, nor either of the parts of those pairs.
    This is very interesting. But I’m curious if this means the military would begin breeding dogs?