Today, there are no standards, certifications, guidelines, or regulations that relate specifically to BCIs and BNCIs. Of course, there are many more general principles that apply. For example, BCI hardware must conform to various guidelines and standards, and research with human or animal participants follows the legal and ethical guidelines that were developed to cover any type of research. In some cases, more general principles are adequate. However, as B(N)CIs develop into mainstream research efforts and mature consumer devices, at least some additional specifications are required that specifically address B(N)CIs.

Here are some examples:

There is currently no widely accepted term or acronym for BCI. While BCI is most common, other people refer to BMI (Brain - Machine Interface), DBI (Direct Brain Interface), and many other terms.

No guidelines specify exactly which devices are, or are not, BCIs.

Many people do not follow common guidelines in scientific reporting. Although some papers have addressed this in the BCI research community, and noted the need for reporting additional details, there are still no established guidelines. For example, authors should be clear about how they determined the bit rate and other performance metrics of their BCI system.

There is no certification process for individuals. For example, is a specific person qualified to work with a severely disabled person who wants a B(N)CI? Does that person know how to select equipment, set up the system, understand the user's unique needs, abilities, and circumstances, handle the legal and ethical guidelines for working with severely disabled persons (which may also need to be updated), develop the best BCI for that user, work with different applications, etc.?



These sorts of specifications will be developed eventually, as happens in any maturing field. There was once a time when there was no clear term or acronym for a wide area network, or regulations about what was a WAN, or any way to certify whether someone was qualified to work with WANs. Hopefully, this post will encourage discussion about certifications, standards, regulations, and guidelines. An important related issue is: who decides? Some sort of committee will need to be established with the necessary experience and credibility. Until then, peer-reviewed papers or other works developed among established researchers could also provide a mechanism to describe the desires and expectations of the B(N)CI research community.