Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
November 4, 2016
Document Release Date: 
October 14, 1998
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2.pdf583.73 KB
ed For Release 2000/08/08 CIA- P96-00789ROO2200500001-2 K AN APPLICATION ORIENTED REMOTE VIEWING EXPERIMENT(U) `J U By: lVV/ 333 Ravenswood Ave. ? Menlo Park, CA 94025 roved Fort'IkeliPaW&02b6Mi~/'d837:3dPA6 P,d0 6lhR002200500001-2 Final Report April 1989 Covering the Period 1 May 1988 to April 1989 AN APPLICATION ORIENTED REMOTE VIEWING EXPERIMENT(U) f`' J 333 Ravenswood Ave. ? Menlo Park, CA 94025 415 326-6200 ? TWX: 910-373-2046 ? Telex: 334-486 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 oved For Release 2000/08/08 : C A-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For ReleascJ L/ASSItIFED6-00789R002200500001-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS (U) LIST OF FIGURES ......... .................. ... .................... iii LIST OF TABLES ......................................................... iii I OBJECTIVE .................................................... 1 II BACKGROUND ................................................. 2 A. Remote Viewing ............................................ 2 B. Fuzzy Set Analysis ......................................... 3 III APPROACH .................................................... 4 A. Remote Viewer ............................................ 4 B. Target Material ........................................... 4 C. Experiment Protocol ......................................... 4 D. Analysis Technique ......................................... 5 IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................... 10 V CONCLUSIONS ................................................ 19 REFERENCES ............................................................ 20 APPENDIX A--REMOTE VIEWING RESPONSE (DRAWINGS) ................... A-1 APPENDIX B--REMOTE VIEWING RESPONSE (TRANSCRIPT) ................. B-1 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2fl00/08/08 : C- RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 SG1A LIST OF FIGURES (U) 1. Viewer 372: I ..............11 2. Viewer 372: ................... 12 3. Viewer 373: ................... 13 4. Viewer 372: ................. 15 5. Viewer 372: A ..................16 6. Viewer 009: ................... 18 LIST OF TABLES (U) 1. Universe of Target And Response Elements (U) .............................. 8 2. Figure of Merit (FM) Summary-( ................10 Approved For Release 20OQ/08/08 : CIA--RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 L Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 I OBJECTIVE (U) The objectives of this experiment were to: ?f Demonstrate the potential of a novel collection technique, known as remote viewing, Determine the degree to which the technique used to analyze remote viewing results is applicable. Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 SG 1 A r J 1 II BACKGROUND (U) lij SRI was asked( - Ito participate in an experiment conducted during the latter half of August, 1988, The primary objectives were (1) to demonstrate the remote viewing of and (2) to apply fuzzy set analysis to interpret the data. A. (U) Remote Viewing SG1A SG1A Approved For Release 2 /08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 (U) Remote viewing (RV) is an apparent human ability to gain access, by mental means alone, to information that is secured by shielding, distance, or time. 1-5 * At least three elements are necessary to conduct an RV experiment: (1) An individual, called a viewer, with RV ability (2) Specific target material (not available to the viewer at the time of the experiment) (3) An analysis technique to determine the degree to which RV occurred In a typical laboratory protocol, a viewer and a monitor-an interviewer who is also unaware of the target material-are sequestered at time To. At To + 5 minutes, an assistant selects the intended target from a large pool of potential targets (e.g., a list of locations within a half-hour drive from the laboratory) using a random procedure. At To + 30 minutes, the assistant is at the selected site and, back at the laboratory, the viewing begins. At To + 45 minutes, the viewing ends and the assistant returns to the laboratory. To provide feedback, the viewer, monitor, and assistant return to the selected site and review the RV data. (U) To determine if RV occurred, similar experiments are conducted using a newly selected target for each trial. Usually, the trials are done with target replacement (i.e., each target is returned to the pool and may be selected again by the random process). (U) References may be found at the end of this report. Approved For Release 2 0/08/08 : Cl - DP96-00789R002200500001-2 B. (U) Fuzzy Set Analysis (U) Since 1972, SRI has developed many procedures to determine whether information has been obtained beyond chance expectation.6-8 In the current method,9 the targets and viewer's responses are described as fuzzy sets of descriptor elements (e.g., presence of water). The outcome of the RV experiment is measured by a figure of merit, which is related to the accuracy and reliability of the viewer's description of the target. (U) ' When RV is applied pthe analysis procedures differ considerably. In laboratory experiments, much is known about the target, but in I -applications, very little target information is known. Thus, the analysis technique must be modified in order to assess the "correct" RV response elements before confirming evidence can be obtained. J 'Long-standing difficulties in applying the RV phenomena to intelligence applications are at least twofold. In a lengthy response, those elements of genuine significance must be identified a priori. Second, even excellent examples of remote viewing do not necessarily imply usefulness. Therefore, RV-derived data should be used in conjunction with information'obtained through more conventional channels. 3 Approved For Release 2/08/08 : CIA;DP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 III APPROACH (U) (U) SRI conducted a 26-hour RV experiment beginning at 1008 on August 24, 1988. The viewer provided data in four different work periods: at 1008 and 1500 on August 24, and at 0910 and 1120 on August 25. The details of the experiment are described below. SRI selected Viewer V372 to participate in this experiment because of his* 10-year experience as a viewer, and because he produced good results in the first experiment in this series, conducted in May, 1987. B. (U) Target Material The target was Included in the target material was the functional aspect i relationships among elementsk and the elements themselves. C. (U) Experiment Protocol ,,,.The SRI team was given the, name of the experiment, a time window during which the experiment would be active, and a photograph and Social Security number of an on-site individual. Other than this, all aspects and details of the experiment were withheld from V372 and SRI personnel. * (U) To keep the identify of the viewer confidential, we refer to the viewer with the pronouns he and his regardless of the viewer's gender. 4 Approved For Release 200 08/08 : CIA- 96-00789R002200500001-2 SG1A Approved For Release 20000_8108 : CIA-RD'96-00789RO02200500001-2 r r r r Four sessions were conducted to provide information. The times and circumstances were as follows: (1) 1008 August 24 V372 was asked to describe the location and details of an event in progress. Details about pertinent personnel were also requested. (2) 1500 August 24 V372 was asked to describe details and activity at. the site demarked by the presence of the sponsor's on-site representative. (3) 0910 August 2S V372 was asked to expand upon his descriptions from the previous day. (4) 1120 August 25 V372 was asked consolidate the information from the previous scans and to provide his concluding remarks. During each session, V372's responses were tape-recorded. He was encouraged to draw details whenever possible. Drawings are contained in Appendix 4, and Appendix B contains verbatim transcripts of all four sessions. (Because of technical difficulties, most of the taped record of the second session was lost. Since the remaining data are intact and since the drawings from the remaining viewings are complete, this gap is not significant.) After all raw data had been delivered to the sponsor, V372 and , SRI personnel were allowed to visit the target site for feedback. D. (U) Analysis Technique As discussed in'Section Ii, quantitative analysis in an intelligence setting poses problems. Any analysis of remote viewing data must be accomplished within the context of a mission statement. An analysis designed only to demonstrate RV is inadequate to enable an assessment, and vice versa. Under another program,? SRI developed a generalized analysis technique that allows for an a priori mission statement. An overview of that technique follows. 5 Approved For Release 2000/0 7- : CIA-RD P9 -00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 200Q108108 : CIA- iDP96-00789ROO2200500001-2 SG1A SG1A SG1A The most important aspect of RV data analysis is the definition of both the target and the RV response. For this analysis, all target and response information is defined as the fuzzy sets T and R, respectively. Each is described below. -The target is defined as a fuzzy set of target elements T[ek,Ak,wk]: ? , ek is an element of a target. For example, an element ? p.k is the membership value of element ek. It represents the degree to which ek is present at the target. for example, might have a membership value of 0.6, indicating that is 60% of the target material. Determined subjectively, ?k is always a valpe from 0 to 1. ? 4- wk is an arbitrary weighting factor for element ek. This factor accounts for differing missions by assigning the SG1A importance of elements relative to each other. The is very SG1A rtant, for example, and might be assigned a weight of 5 when compared with which might have a weight of 0.5. The RV response is similarly defined as a fuzzy set of response elements R(ek,p.k,wk]. The membership values for response elements, however, have a somewhat different meaning than those for target elements. Membership values, ?k. represent an-analyst's assessment as to the degree of presence of ekin the response. For declarative statements, ?k- 1 unless a viewer volunteers a specific or implied importance of ek to the overall target. A degree of interpretation is allowed for nondeclarative statements by letting Ak< 1. The response weights, Wk, are identical to the target weights. ( ewe define accuracy as the percent of target material described correctly by a response. Likewise, we define reliability (of a viewer) as the percent of a response that is correct. The figure of merit is the product of the two; to obtain a high figure of merit, a viewer's description of a target must be largely correct and contain few extraneous images. In Approved For Release 200 /08/08 : CIA-RD~96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2001Q/08/08 : CIA-Rl P96-00789R002200500001-2 fuzzy set terminology, these quantities for the jth target/response pair are as follows: Fa wk (Rir1T)k k Accuracy, = ai = .1 wk (Ri n Ti)k k Reliability = r = i i ,Y WkTJ,k k wk Rj.k k Figure of Merit, - Mi - a, x r, The sum over k is called the sigma count in fuzzy set terminology. The sigma count is defined as the sum of the membership values, ?, for the elements of the response, target, and their intersection-that is, Ri, Ti, and (Rill Ti), respectively. 2. (U) Target and Response Data The universe of target and response elements is drawn from the August, 1988, experiment. We define three element categories: functions, relationships, and objects. These categories are weighted 1.0, 0.75, and 0.50, respectively. (U) Table 1 shows the universe of target and response elements and the formal definition of T and R. All scans were considered together, rather than scan by scan. The various scaling weights are shown in parentheses adjacent to the appropriate factors. The relative weights are derived from SRI's best assessment of the operational utility of each element. The response membership values, R(?), were determined from the raw data (see Appendices A and B). The target membership values, T(?), were determined by SRI personnel during a site visit in September, 1988. All elements, however, were determined by an SRI analyst post hoc in order to allow a more accurate assessment of reliability. Elements derived from the response were taken literally. Those elements having no corresponding element in the target (i.e., T(?) = 0) were assigned the average weight of elements present in the target. 7 Approved For Release 20 b/08/08 : CIA- DP96-00789ROO2200500001-2 SG1A Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 1-1 SG1A IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (U) Table 2 shows the figure-of-merit analysis for the experiment using the fuzzy sets defined in Table 1. The target was the The target-response intersection is shown as IT n RI, and the sigma counts of the target and response sets are shown as ITI and IRS, respectively. N is the number of elements that were identified for each category. All quantities include the relative weights shown in Table 1. 'The weighted accuracy total of 0.80 (i.e., 80% of the identifiably elements at the target site were correctly described by V372) agrees well with the qualitative correspondence shown in Figures 1 and 2.* Figure 3 shows V372's drawing of a plan view of the target area, which appears to match the experimental situation almost exactly. The figures of merit show that, since the first experiment in this series, V372's ability to sense functions and objects has increased modestly, and his ability to sense relationships has increased by a factor of four. The relatively low value of 0.57 for the combined (weighted by the category weighting factors) target elements is consistent with the elaborate nature of V372's response (see the original response in Appendices A and B). FIGURE OF MERIT SUMMARY' Element Type N IT fRi ITI IRI Acc. Rel. M FUNCTIONS 8 10.00 11.40 12.43 0.88 0.80 0.70 RELATIONSHIPS 16 15.05 21.95 23.45 0.69 0.64 0.44 OBJECTS 48 46.20 56.70 72.92 0.82 0.63 0.52 TOTAL 72 - - - 0.80 0.65 0.52 (U) All figures are to be taken as indicators of qualitative correspondence. The drawings and photographs have been selected to illustrate the correspondence. 10 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2080/O8/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789ROO2200500001-2 SG1A Approved For Release 200/08/08 : CIA-RDP96J-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 200P/08/08 : CIA-RTP96-00789ROO2200500001-2 3- ~O SG1A 00/08/08 : CIMRDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release X000/08/08 : CIA-RPDP96-00789R002200500001-2 FIGURE 3 VIEWER 372: PLAN VIEW OF THE TARGET Approved For Release 2 09/08/08 : CIA-DP96-00789R002200500001-2 SG1A Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 200/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 ? G4OUA D Fob A 4. ? SP=-C( F I r . A CA I D Oc17 ~rol~ ~~ 04'IU4 /, ~O~E''71N 1~~~ ~ ~ ? j*eKeo 4) r T4 eo 10 Op 64alt~L)FrM4S. SG1A 15 Approved For Release 200/08/08 : CIA- DP96-00789RO02200500001-2 Approved For Release 200 a(Eir "t u ms's. SG1A 0/08/08 : CIA-RPP96-00789R002200500001-2 16 Approved For Release 2 QO/08/08 : CIA DP96-00789R002200500001-2 C 1 Approved For Release 2000/08/08: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 :After SRI personnel had been debriefed about the target, a second long-term participant, V009, was asked to view the same event. He was told to provide whatever information he could about an event that had taken place approximately two weeks earlier. Viewer V009 was told nothing else about the nature of the target or target event, and he worked without an RV monitor. Since this was an ad hoc test, not intended to be part of the series, we have not conducted a formal analysis of V009's response. Qualitatively, however, V009 appeared to do as well as V372, given that he remained in session, unmonitored, for only 20 minutes. Figure 6 shows one part of his drawing response that captures V009's theme. Interestingly, V009 also appeared to be confused by the multitude of potential target material in the immediate area. He drew an airport and recognized that it was not the intended target. 17 Approved For Release L/08/08 : CI- RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 i SG1A L Approved For Release 2000/08/08 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 200/08/08 : CIA-R~P96-007898002200500001-2 V CONCLUSIONS (U) Viewer V372 was asked to use RV to describe the activity of Project 'during August 24 and 25, 1988. He described approximately 80% of the identifiable target elements correctly, and 71% of his responses corresponded with the intended target. Although 29% noise remains, if this experiment had been an actual )activity, the noise probably would not have been a significant distracting factor. 19 Approved For Release 2000/p8T08 : CIA-RDP 6-00789R002200500001-2 008 : CIA- 96-00789R002200500001-2 Approved For Release 2000 1 L L REFERENCES (U) 1. Puthoff, H. E. and Targ, R., "Perceptual Augmentation Techniques (U)," Final Report, SRI Project 3183, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (December 1975) 2. Puthoff, H. E. and Targ, R., "A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer Over Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research," Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 64, No. 3 (March 1976) *JNCLASSIFIED. 3. Puthoff, H. E., et al., "Advanced Threat Technique Assessment (U)," Final Report, SRI Project 5309, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (October 1978) 4. Jahn, R. G., "The Persistent Paradox of Psychic Phenomena: An Engineering Perspective," Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 70, No. 2, pp. 136-170 (1982). UNCLASSIFIED 5. Puthoff, H. E., "RV Reliability, Enhancement, and Evaluation (U)," Final Report, SRI Project 4028-1.. SRI International, Menlo Park, California (January 1984) 1- 1. 6. May, E. C., "A Remote Viewing Evaluation Protocol (U)," Final Report (revised), SRI Project 4028, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (July 1983)( z 7. May, E. C., Humphrey, B. S., and Puthoff, H. E., "An Automated RV Evaluation Procedure (U)," Final Report, SRI Proiect 7408, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (May 1985) 8. May, E. C., Humphrey, B. S., and Mathews, C., "A Figure of Merit Analysis for Free-Response Material," Proceedings of the 28th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association, pp. 343-354, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts (August 1985) UNCLASSIFIED. 9. Humphrey, B. S., Trask, V. V., May, E. C., and Thomson M. J., "Remote Viewing Evaluation Techniques (U)," Final Report-Objective A, Task-4, SRI Project 1291, SRI International, Menlo Park, California (December 1986) 1 20 Approved For Release 2000/ 8/08: CIA-R 6-00789R002200500001-2