Implanted-BCI Evidence Recovery Authority — Neurotechnology Trials

The mandate

A trial review found that implanted-device firmware, neural decoder versions, calibration sessions and participant task records did not always resolve to the same effective configuration. Clinical teams preserved participant care and contained the affected analyses, but the systems executive resigned. The company needs accountable recovery across research, clinical and device boundaries while authorised investigators determine study consequences.

The interim must start within three weeks and serve for twelve months, spanning affected-session reconstruction, two controlled release cycles, inspection readiness and successor induction. Permanent recruitment begins after a ninety-day configuration baseline. Six weeks are protected for overlap; the term will not extend for additional indications, elective hardware redesign or trials outside the presently bounded programme.

Handover requires every priority session to connect participant and implant pseudonyms, consent and protocol version, firmware, electrode map, decoder, calibration, task, stimulation constraint, raw signal, derived output, clinician observation and analysis disposition. The successor must lead an unseen rollback and site-transfer exercise, then accept residual legacy-signal, research-code and external-site dependencies.

The authority may halt software or decoder deployment, quarantine analytical datasets, enforce witnessed configuration, direct the approved $28 million recovery and appoint temporary technical control owners. Principal investigators and clinicians retain care and protocol decisions; Quality and Regulatory retain formal determinations. The interim cannot modify consent, classify safety events, select participants, appoint permanently or commit spend beyond delegation.

Clinical treatment, expansion into commercial care and invention of new decoding science are out of scope. The leader may demand reproducibility and controlled interfaces but cannot substitute platform evidence for medical judgement or institutional review. Recovery is bounded to the trustworthy configuration, execution and interpretation trail necessary for the current trials and their authorised reporting.

Why this seat is open

The configuration discrepancy exposed a system whose research flexibility outpaced trial-grade evidence, and the responsible executive left during containment. Site investigators can protect participants but cannot redesign company-wide control alongside active study commitments. The board wants temporary authority to restore the baseline before choosing a permanent leader for the next development phase.

What you will own

• Reconstruct affected sessions across implant identity, firmware, electrode map, decoder, calibration, task, signal, output and analytical disposition.
• Define effective configuration and release evidence for device, decoder and protocol components that evolve on different controlled cycles.
• Decide which deployments and datasets may resume, require corroboration, need reprocessing or must remain quarantined.
• Command exercises covering decoder rollback, calibration drift, site transfer, missing signal segment, firmware mismatch and consent change.
• Establish cross-site acknowledgement and correction paths that preserve original session evidence and subsequent scientific interpretation.
• Govern recovery against bounded participant exposure, reproducible analyses, release traceability, inspection evidence and unresolved dependency burn-down.
• Transfer authority through two controlled releases and successor acceptance of research-code, signal and site-interface limitations.

Candidate qualifications

• Held executive neural-device, implantable-medical-software or clinical-research systems authority across active human studies and multiple sites.
• Reconstructed session evidence joining implanted hardware, firmware, calibration, adaptive algorithms, raw physiological signals and derived endpoints.
• Stopped technical releases when configuration ambiguity could affect participant risk or scientific validity under investor and programme pressure.
• Worked with investigators, clinicians, institutional review, Quality and Regulatory without appropriating their clinical or statutory judgements.
• Governed adaptive or personalised model change where each participant’s history constrained rollback, comparison and reproducible reanalysis.
• Handed a recovered trial technology function to permanent leadership through live release and adversarial site-transfer qualification.

Non-negotiables

• Available within three weeks for Boston-based service and frequent presence at participating clinical and engineering sites.
• Has governed implanted or similarly high-risk neurotechnology in human research; consumer-wearable AI experience does not qualify.
• No undisclosed relationship with investigators, device suppliers, analytical vendors or clinical sites inside the affected programme.
• Will preserve participant protection, original signals and authorised medical authority even where recovery delays a financing milestone.

1. 49 words maximum. State your Boston availability and one adaptive-device configuration discrepancy you bounded in human research.
2. 49 words maximum. How did you preserve a participant session while correcting its decoder or calibration interpretation?
3. 49 words maximum. Which unseen site-transfer failure would qualify permanent leadership before your handover?