Approved For Release 2<S£fi'R Eft-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
F.
(U)
Computer Assisted Search (CAS)
(S/NF/CL-3)
To determine the applicability of computers as aids in the general search
problem, we have developed a graduated series of studies—beginning at a basic level of
investigation and evolving toward real-time DoD applications.
As a
first step in determining
the degree to which a computer can be used as an aid in search problems, an experiment
was conducted that demonstrated that an abstract computer-generated target could be located
by psychoenergetic means.
The next stage involved testing whether an “association” between
an abstract computer “target” and an actual target could be established.
1.
(U)
Basic Investigation (Simulation)
(U)
We have conducted an experiment to determine
if an abstract computer-
generated target can be located by psychoenergetic means.
To accomplish this, we designed
an experiment that would also provide information with regard to two possible mechanisms:
•
To search in space for a target that remains fixed for the duration of a
trial.
•
To search for a target that
is rapidly moving in space.
(U)
The
first case
is the more familiar "dowsing”
situation; a target, whose
location
is unknown, must be found by psychoenergetic means.
The second case was
established on the basis of earllier research at SRI.
Namely,
that
it
is possible for an
individual to initiate an action at the proper time to optimize the result of a psychoenergetic
experiment.
(U)
During the
CAS experiment, seven individuals were asked to contribute 50
trials each.
To test the “dowsing” hypothesis, the target location was fixed throughout a
trial.
To test the timing hypothesis, the target location was changed once each millisecond.
Dynamic versus static target trials were determined by a balanced random protocol that was
the same for each of the participants.
Furthermore, they were unaware that there were two
test conditions.
A bounded area representing the perimeter of a 20 X 20 cell matrix was
shown to the participant, who could register his/her response by moving a graphics pointing
device (mouse), and could press a button to indicate the choice.
Each participant was told
that the target could be any place within the display boundary, and when the moment
“seemed right,” could register his/her choice by pressing the button on the mouse.
Each
SECRET
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Release 2(®fiClR:EiS-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
CENTER LANE—3/NOFORN
(U)
participant was constrained to provide
a few
trials
(< 5)
at each
sitting.
The analysis that
was used
is described in Section III.A.
(U)
From a purely mechanistic point of view, we might expect that locating a
dynamically-moving target would be “easier” than a
static one.
Because the target
is moving
once a millisecond, the target
is, on the average,
actually “under” the mouse button twice
each second.
Thus, two times
a second, the participant has the opportunity to locate the
target correctly.
He/she must, however, press the mouse button
at the proper time
(finding
a dynamically-moving target translates to finding a moment in time to
initiate a response).
In the
static case,
it
is possible
(worst case) that the location
will never be under the mouse
button, because the RVer,
in moving the button display around the screen, misses the actual
location.
Thus, we would expect a bias in favor of finding the dynamic target simply because
the number of opportunities of registering the correct response
is greater.
(U)
The results of the basic investigation are shown in Table
5.
Five of the seven
participants produced significant evidence of psychoenergetic functioning (p < 0,0004).
Of
these five, three produced results favoring the timing hypothesis, and two favored the
“dowsing” hypothesis.
Two participants produced significant differences between temporal
and spatial “dowsing;” one
(#531) favoring temporal, the other (#807) favoring spatial.
Participant 531 showed a 27 percent reduction from the mean chance expectation (MCE)
distance of 10.4 units, while Participant 807 showed a
16.1 percent reduction.
Overall, there
is strong evidence that individuals can locate abstract computer generated targets,
yet there
is
no evidence that there
is a preference for the timing technique.
2.
(U)
Location of Real-World Targets (Known)
(S/NF/CL-3)
The
first step in determining
if the CAS technique
is capable of
locating unknown DoD targets of interest,
is to demonstrate that the technique can be applied
to real-world targets whose locations are known.
This step has been taken under
client-controlled test conditions,
as described in Section G.
- 22 -
SECRET
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Release 20
^J
j^C
<R BT'RDP96 '00788R001 800260001 -5
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Table
(U)
RESULTS OF BASIC INVESTIGATION
(p-values)
RVer
Space
Time
Difference*
531
.560
.009'*’
.038’*’
240
.365
. 042
. 164
859
.528
. 042 ^
. 100
452
.752
.911
.691
310
.184
.363
.652
f
*
*
807
.047'
. 994
.998
164
.031'*’
.295
. 826
Tested against
the hypothesis
that time >
space.
^Significant
^"Target avoidance.
UNCLASSIFIED
3.
(U)
CAS Against Real Targets (Application)
(S/NF/CL-3)
As a final test, can CAS techniques be used to locate unknown
targets that are of interest to the DoD?
The use of both
static and dynamic techniques will
be considered.
(U)
In the case of the
latter,
a useful technique
is to divide the search space into
N regions. A counter
is incremented once each millisecond as before, but
it begins
at one
and recycles after N +
1.
The extra
cell
is used to cover the case of “none of the above”.
To illustrate how this technique might work,
let us consider the case of a kidnap victim who
is suspected of being held somewhere in the west Beruit area.
This area
is divided into 20
regions of interest.
(The CAS counter then cycles through 21.) A large number of trials are
collected for a given participant, and a large number of participants could be used.
Statistics
developed during the known target portion of the study would be used as an input to the
- 23 -
SECRET
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Release 2Cj|i)0U:£ip-RDP96-OO788ROO1 800260001 -5
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
(U)
evaluation program to determine the most likely location.
Should
this technique prove
successful,
it has wide application beyond the spatial location of targets of interest.
Because
the CAS algorithm only involves selecting the proper moment to
register
a response, the
meaning of the numbers used
in the cycle counter
is completely arbitrary, and thus can
correspond to the elements of any discrete search problem.
G,
(S/NF/CL-3)
Client-Controlled Long-Distance Test of
“Agent” /Building Search,
Facility Level (Continuum)
(S/NF/CL-3)
As
a measure
of progress made during the contract effort,
a
test was
proposed in which the Search team put together by SRI would attempt to locate targets
chosen by, and under the control
of,
the client (Army INSCOM).
For this purpose two
experimental series were designed and carried out.
1.
(U)
Long-Distance “Agent” Search
(S/NF/CL-3)
For the
first test series, Army INSCOM personnel chose
a
series of
ten locations on the
Ft. Meade, Maryland, base.
Each of the ten locations were to be
visited,
in turn,
for one hour,
at predetermined
times, by an INSCOM “agent.”
Members
of the Search team where given a photograph of the “agent”
to be located,
a listing of the
target times (1100 and 1600, EST, on 28-30 November, and on 3-4 Dec.), and
a map of
the
Ft. Meade base marked with
a
1.5 km x
1.5 km square indicating the
overall target area
of iterest.
(U)
Four Search RVers were chosen for this task (Nos.
164,
688,
198, and 232),
three of whom demonstrated success
in other search tasks covered in this report, the fourth
(#232) being reported as having been successful
in experiments conducted in
a training class
taught by one of the others
(#198).
During the time-frame of the experiment, two of the
RVers were located in California
(Nos. 164 and 688), while the remaining two were in
Florida.
Thus, the experiment was carried out over baselines of several thousand km.
(S/NF/CL-3)
The experiment was carried out with the SRI researchers blind as to
the target locations
(that
is, the experiment was double blind.)
At the end of the targeting
period, the search-determined locations were transmitted to INSCOM,
after which a
list of
the actual target locations used were made available to the SRI team.
- 24 -
SECRET
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
UNCLASSIFIED
(U)
In the 2.25 km square area, the mean chance expectation (MCE) distance
is
780 m.
Of the four Search RVers,
all generated lesser mean distances
(see Table
6), and
the results of three of the RVers are each independently
statistically significant.
In the forty
trials generated
(4 RVers X
trials each),
20 percent
(8)
yielded target-response distances
within
3 squares
(225 m) on the 400-square matrix used for analysis;
this includes
a direct
hit which
is expected only once in 400
trials by chance.
The
overall combined probability
for this 40-trial series can be determined from the raw data
2Z
i
Z =
——
’
P <
2.5
x 10
.
VN
Thus,
this test under client-controlled double-blind conditions yields convincing evidence
that psychoenergetic search processes can to
a
statistically significant degree be used
as a
viable search tool.
Table
(U)
LONG-DISTANCE “AGENT” SEARCH:
CLIENT-DETERMINED
TARGET SITES
(MCE Distance = 780 m)
RVer
Mean Target
Response
Distance
Area
Reduction
P
164
391 m
75%
2.62 X 10”
688
616 m
3 8%
*
0.39
198
447
m
67%
1.45 X 10“ 2
232
492 m
60%
4.65 X 10“ 2
^Nonsignificant
.
UNCLASSIFIED
(U)
An additional facet that surfaced in the above application was the fact that,
due to scheduling conflicts, some percentage of the search attempts were carried out at some
- 25 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
UNCLASSIFIED
(U)
time following the target period, ranging from as
little as a few minutes to as much as two
days.
In these cases, the RVer nonetheless concentrated on the scheduled past time period,
rather than on the
(present) time of the actual search attempt.
Detailed examination of the
data generated by the three significant RVers shows that although 40 percent each of their
data was produced on this retrospective basis, there was no
statistically significant difference
between the real-time and retrospective conditions (one-way analysis of variance,
dfl =
1,
df2 =
8, F = 0.54,
2.40, and
1.51,
respectively,
for RVers
164,
198 and 232;
F = 5.32 required for significant differences
at the p = 0.05
level).
2.
(U)
Long-Distance “Building” Search
(U)
The dynamic CAS technique was used to attempt to locate a building at the
sponsor’s
facility, that building being known only to the sponsor.
A map of the sponsor’s
facility, unlabeled as to buildings, was divided into 20 numbered equal-area rectangles in a
4X5 matrix,
( 4 columns,
5 rows).
Thus,
starting in the upper
left corner, the upper row
contained rectangles
1 -
4; the second row, 5-8; third row 9 - 12; fourth row,
13 -
16;
fifth (bottom) row,
17 - 20.
(U)
An incremental counter was used to cycle through the numbers
1 - 20 at a
rate of
1 millisecond each. A search RVer's task was to interrupt the counter
(by pressing
the ’’mouse” button)
at the number corresponding to the map area that contains the building
designated as
’’target” by the sponsor,
given only the name of the building (Whitesell
building).
For each RVer,
a histogram
is constructed corresponding to the number of times
he/she selects each of the numbers.
(U)
The two individuals
( 531 and 859
) who had done well in the abstract
experiment in timing were asked to provide 50 trials each to
start;
in the event an
individual’s selections resulted in a
tie or ties for a maximally-selected rectangle,
trials were
added in 5-trial blocks until a single choice was outstanding.
In the case of 531, 55
trials
were required to meet this criterion;
for 859, 75 were required.
(U)
In Figure
6 we display the histograms for each participant.
For RVer 531,
the expected number of choices for each rectangle
is 55/20 = 2.75; the maximally-selected
rectangle
( #17
) was chosen 6 times, the second choice
( #14
) was chosen
5 times.
For
RVer
859, the expected number of choices for each rectangle
is 75/20 = 3.75; the
maximally-selected
( #6
) was chosen 7 times, the second choice
( nos.
4 and
18, a tie
)
- 26 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
; CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Rel^|j^(^0^l^:^j^j^6-00788R001 800260001 -5
(U)
was chosen 6 times.
Following RVer selections, the answer
( rectangle #15
) was provided
to the experimenters, who,
in turn, provided
it to the search RVers as feedback.
(U)
With regard fo evaluation of the results,
as in the previous section one can
use the 400—square matrix to calculate the probability of observed separations between target
and response rectangle centers as compared with the MCE distance.
For RVer 531, the
first-choice selection yields a target/response rectangle separation distance somewhat greater
than MCE
( 3.4%
), while the second choice yields a better result, a 52.0% reduction from
MCE.
For RVer 859, the first-choice selection yields a 9.5% reduction from MCE, while
the second
( a tie
)
yields one result at 38.5% reduction from MCE,
a second
at 24.8%
greater than MCE distance.
Given the small-sample nature of this particular pilot test of the
CAS technique,
it
is not possible to draw meaningful
statistical conclusions.
We are
nonetheless encouraged by observation of relatively large reductions from MCE among the
top two selections for each of the search RVers, and therefore consider this procedure a
promising candidate for further development.
Number
of
Choices
unclassified
Map Position
FIGURE
CHOICE HISTOGRAM
- 27 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Release 20^g^)R:§lJ-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
V SUMMARY (U)
A.
(U)
Overview
(S/NF/CL—3)
The research effort described in this report addresses the continuing
requirement in military operations to develop techniques to locate tactical and strategic targets
of interest whose positions are not known, or are known only approximately.
Specifically, we
have investigated the possible use of psychoenergetic search techniques as an adjunct to other
technological means.
Experiments have been carried out, examining several promising
methods that have emerged in the field over the past decade or so.
Care has been taken to
assess the various procedures under strict double-blind conditions, and have included
successful application to the location of targets under client control over baselines of several
thousand km.
B.
(U)
Focus of Investigation
(U)
In this study the search techniques under consideration have been investigated in
applications ranging from the locations of objects hidden in the same building as the search
RVer,
to the search for an individual or building over transcontinental baselines.
The
methods examined range from simple one-step map marking
(“map dowsing”),
to
calculator- and computer-assisted search involving sophisticated
statistical averaging
techniques.
(U)
Strong evidence emerged in this study that certain individuals using certain
techniques were capable of narrowing down the area of target location to a statistically
significant degree, indicating the basic viability of the psychoenergetic approach as a search
tool.
- 28 -
SECRET
CENTER LANE-3/NOFORN
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5
Approved For Relejj(|^)£3|0|^^|/^|g^-00788R001 800260001 -5
C.
(U)
Recommendations for Follow-On Actions
(U)
Given the quality of response to the search task, and the observations emerging
from detailed examination of various facets of that response, the following recommendations
for follow-on actions are offered:
1.
Since various individuals showed “preferences”
for various tasks
(as far as
their capabilities were concerned), examine personality profiles obtained for
these individuals, and determine by testing with other individuals
if
personality structure
is an important factor.
2.
Given the apparent relative insensitivity to RVer-target baseline distance
emerging in this pilot work, examine this variable in depth in further
studies.
3.
Given the apparent relative insensitivity to temporal distance between RVer
and target event
(at least for retrospective conditions) observed in this pilot
work, examine this variable in further depth.
4.
Investigate further the power of statistical averaging techniques to determine
whether the modest amplification obtained with such techniques to date can
be improved significantly.
5.
Follow up on statements by Search RVers that success
is often associated
with certain physiological sensations
(e.g.,
“stickiness”
in the fingers during
map dowsing”), by investigating the possibility of using
physiological-correlate measures to obtain a more sensitive indicator of
“signal” detection.
- 29 -
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2003/09/10
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 800260001 -5