IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1000740.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting Odor Pleasantness with an Electronic Nose

Author

Listed:
  • Rafi Haddad
  • Abebe Medhanie
  • Yehudah Roth
  • David Harel
  • Noam Sobel

Abstract

A primary goal for artificial nose (eNose) technology is to report perceptual qualities of novel odors. Currently, however, eNoses primarily detect and discriminate between odorants they previously “learned”. We tuned an eNose to human odor pleasantness estimates. We then used the eNose to predict the pleasantness of novel odorants, and tested these predictions in naïve subjects who had not participated in the tuning procedure. We found that our apparatus generated odorant pleasantness ratings with above 80% similarity to average human ratings, and with above 90% accuracy at discriminating between categorically pleasant or unpleasant odorants. Similar results were obtained in two cultures, native Israeli and native Ethiopian, without retuning of the apparatus. These findings suggest that unlike in vision and audition, in olfaction there is a systematic predictable link between stimulus structure and stimulus pleasantness. This goes in contrast to the popular notion that odorant pleasantness is completely subjective, and may provide a new method for odor screening and environmental monitoring, as well as a critical building block for digital transmission of smell.Author Summary: Electronic noses (eNoses) are devices aimed at mimicking animal noses. Typically, these devices contain a set of sensors that generate a pattern representing an odor. Application of eNoses entails first “training” the eNose to a particular odor, and once the eNose has “learned”, it can then be used to detect and identify this odor. Using this approach, eNoses have been tested in applications ranging from disease diagnosis to space-ship interior environmental monitoring. However, in contrast to animal noses, eNoses have not been used to generate information on novel odors they hadn't learned. Here, rather than train an eNose on particular odorants, we trained an eNose to the perceptual axis of odorant pleasantness. We found that this eNose was then able to generalize and rate the pleasantness of novel odors it never smelled before, and that these ratings were about 80% similar to those of naïve human raters who had not participated in the eNose training phase. Furthermore, the results replicated across cultures without retraining of the device. This result contrasts the popular notion that odorant pleasantness is completely subjective, and may allow for numerous applications, such as an environmental monitor that would warn of malodor regardless of its source.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafi Haddad & Abebe Medhanie & Yehudah Roth & David Harel & Noam Sobel, 2010. "Predicting Odor Pleasantness with an Electronic Nose," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-11, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1000740
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000740
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000740
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000740&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000740?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rafi Haddad & Liran Carmel & Noam Sobel & David Harel, 2008. "Predicting the Receptive Range of Olfactory Receptors," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(2), pages 1-8, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1000740. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.