At bioMECI, we believe that working with physiological data requires not only technical literacy, but also an understanding of how data acquires meaning, how it moves through technological systems, and who retains control over it.
1. THE SOURCE as a Window of Observation #
From a technical perspective, THE SOURCE is a real-time physiological signal acquisition platform and routing device. One way to think about it is as a microphone, telescope, or window of observation: it makes signals available without determining what those signals mean or what should be done with them.
THE SOURCE is not dependent on a cloud-based service and does not automatically transmit physiological data to an external server. It operates locally on machine it is connected to as a plug-and-play device, while the user determines where its signals are directed.
Signals can be routed into software environments such as TouchDesigner, Max/MSP, SuperCollider, Ableton Live, Arduino-based systems, or other digital and hardware environments for creative or otherwise interpretations. These signals can also be routed through audio interfaces and processed using external equipment. The pathway is designed and controlled solely by the user.
This distinction is fundamental to how we approach data literacy and ethical usage at bioMECI: THE SOURCE acquires and distributes signals; the user determines what happens to them next.
2. Real-Time by Default #
The Source itself does not automatically record, archive, upload, or retain acquired physiological signals. In its simplest configuration, signals exist as a continuously changing real-time stream. They are acquired, routed into the chosen system, processed, and disappear as the device is unplugged or turned off.
A project can therefore be designed as a closed, locally controlled system in which physiological information is used only while an interaction, experiment, artwork, or performance is taking place. Recording and storage can be deliberately introduced through downstream software or hardware, but these are additional decisions made by the user or project team rather than default functions of THE SOURCE.
This makes an important distinction between sensing and collecting. Something that lies between sensing and collecting is a process of observation. Observing a signal does not necessarily require creating a permanent dataset. The real-time exposure of data through artistic and creative means without attaching identifiable markers can be equally telling and insightful.
3. Data and Meaning #
Data does not arrive with the meaning. At the point of acquisition, THE SOURCE does not automatically attach a person’s name, account, demographic information, location, or other identifying metadata to a physiological signal. What initially enters a computational system is a changing stream of numerical values representing measured physiological activity.
To the computer, these values do not inherently represent emotion, intention, identity, health, stress, attention, or any other human category. They are signals.
Meaning begins to emerge when people and computational systems start to select, label, classify, compare, correlate, visualise, sonify, store, or otherwise interpret those signals.
This is where data literacy becomes particularly important. A physiological measurement and an interpretation of that measurement are not the same thing. A change in electrical activity may be measurable, but the meaning attributed to that change depends upon the sensing configuration, context, methodology, algorithms, assumptions, and people involved in interpreting it.
We therefore encourage users of THE SOURCE to ask not only:
What can we measure?
but also:
What are we claiming that this measurement means?
4. THE SOURCE as Mediator #
We understand THE SOURCE as a mediator between living systems and technological systems. Those living systems may include humans, but sensing practices can also extend toward plants, fungi, environments, and other biological processes. The Source creates a point of connection between these living processes and a technical, digital, artistic, scientific, or cybernetic system designed around them.
Importantly, THE SOURCE does not need to function as an authority that explains the body. It can instead provide a means of observing change, constructing feedback, experimenting with relationships, and allowing biological activity to participate in a larger system. This methodology is particularly valuable in artistic and research-creation contexts, where physiological signals may operate as dynamic material rather than as diagnostic information.
5. Ethics Begin With Interpretation #
Technology alone cannot guarantee ethical practice. Although THE SOURCE can support a highly local, transparent, and minimally extractive technical configuration, responsible sensing also depends upon the social and organisational structures surrounding the technology.
Questions of governance therefore need to accompany questions of signal acquisition:
Who determines why sensing is taking place?
Who controls the equipment and receiving software?
Who decides what is recorded?
Where does recorded information reside?
Who can access it?
How are physiological signals interpreted?
Who determines whether those interpretations are appropriate?
Can information be reused for another purpose?
Can participants withdraw their data?
Who has the authority to pause or terminate the sensing process?
These decisions transform a technological infrastructure into a data practice that requires deeper scrutiny and management protocols.
6. Data Sovereignty #
Data sovereignty requires more than keeping information on a local computer. It concerns the relationships of ownership, governance, access, interpretation, consent, and authority surrounding information.
When working with individuals and diverse communities — including cultural groups, historically represented or underrepresented communities, and communities with distinct governance traditions, ethical frameworks, or data-management protocols — bioMECI recognises that project development and technical design should be informed by the values, policies, knowledge systems, and decision-making practices of those involved. Rather than imposing a predetermined model of data collection or interpretation, the sensing and data-management process should be adapted to the specific protocols and expectations of each collaboration.
THE SOURCE can support configurations in which:
- processing remains on a locally controlled computer or system;
- no cloud service or external account is required;
- identifying metadata is not attached to signals by default;
- physiological information is not recorded unless explicitly agreed upon;
- temporary and recorded files are managed according to an agreed protocol;
- participants and collaborators determine how signals may be interpreted, represented, shared, retained, or withdrawn; and
- sensing can be paused or terminated at any time.
The appropriate configuration will ultimately depend upon the people, communities, research context, and relationships involved.
7. From Data Acquisition to Data Literacy #
For bioMECI, data literacy means understanding the entire journey of a signal. It means recognising the difference between a body and its measurement, a measurement and its data representation, and data representation and interpretation.
THE SOURCE occupies an intentionally early position within this process. It provides access to physiological signals and allows those signals to be routed into systems created by artists, researchers, designers, performers, scientists, educators, communities, and other practitioners.
Our aim is therefore not simply to make physiological sensing more accessible, but to encourage sensing practices that are transparent, situated, consensual, critically interpreted that also invites evaluation and feedback, and accessible to and by the people involved.