![Biotech Biotech](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/biotech_64.png)
![Science Science](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/science_64.png)
Caltech Creates Electronic Nose 154
eldavojohn writes "Researchers have created an electronic nose that can detect odor and identify which odors are a concern to it. From the article, 'The Lewis Group a division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at Caltech have a working model of an electronic nose. The efforts of Caltech scientists has led to an array of simple, readily fabricated chemically sensitive conducted polymer film. An array of broadly-cross reactive sensors respond to a variety of odors. However, the pattern of differential responses across the array produces a unique pattern for each odorant. The electronic nose can identify, classify and quantify when necessary the vapor or odor that poses a concern or threat.'"
Why fix what isn't broken? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I feel obliged, I mean obligated, to ask, can I have your autograph?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's wrong in the article, too (Score:2)
Bugs me too, dude, but I think this is a battle we are going to lose, long term. Even the City of Pasadena has roadsigns pointing to campus that spell it as two words.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
TBH I don't think most of us can tell the difference with capitalisation, or don't care. There's various other things like the MOD/DOD that shouldn't be capitalised in certain ways, but people still do.
As for the nose, how do they know that what is smells is correct? Surely it's a bit like colour in that it is entirely subjective as to how it is represented: does everyone see red in the same way as I do? Do roses smell the same to everyone? That means they've either made a chemical
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Is there another country that speaks English?
Re: (Score:2)
No, this is not subjective. The same rose will give off the same chemicals regardless of who does the smelling. The same colour red has always the same wavelength regardless of who does the looking. Differences in perception only start in the brain (and sensory organs)
Re: (Score:2)
But is the chemical the smell, and is the wavelength the colour?
It's a bit philosophical, but a chemical mix of odours detected by a sensor isn't necessarily acting as a nose depending on what you want an "electronic nose" for.
I also wonder how it works on things where the 'known' composition can vary. Will it mi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, yes, since these represent the necessary and sufficient stimuli for you to perceive the smell as the smell of roses or the colour as the colour red. I don't think there's a need to go philosophical on this point.
What you are really talking about, I think, is the experience of perceiving a smell or odour. Then it's very clear that everything depends on who is doing the smelling/looking and nobody is going to argue that electronicc noses
Re: (Score:1)
> represented: does everyone see red in the same way as I do? Do roses smell the same to everyone? That means they've either made a chemical sensor
> with a lookup table or they've made one hell of a clever robot that can perceptualise and abstract away from the chemicals to the 'actual' smell.
Surely you can stick something in front of the nose, have it t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I know it's in America, but that doesn't mean that every comment should be written in American. Relise is correct English (even if Firefox currently seems to disagree), while realize is correct American. It's called international diversity of language.
Re: (Score:2)
But it wasn't
http://m-w.com/dictionary/Relise [m-w.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Realise is a correct English word, though, and Firefox's English dictionary thinks it is correct (even if it doesn't think Firefox is)
Re: (Score:1)
Artificial Nose (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Artificial Nose (Score:5, Interesting)
However, in general films and games have steered clear of the sense of smell. In gaming, visuals and sound are a given. Vibrating controllers try to deal with the sense of touch. Smell (and taste) have been ignored. As usual, it will probably be porn that leads the way - just think of the possibilities!
Re:Artificial Nose (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Goatse? Tubgirl?
Re:Artificial Nose (Score:4, Interesting)
That might just be because we rely so little on smell, what is accepted as normal has expanded with respect to this sense (as opposed to color-blindness, for example).
Re: (Score:2)
On audio we're kind of there though.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(I'm gonna leap a bit off topic, too.)
It COULD just be that microphones and cameras lack an associative library/databank comparable to the human brain and powers of coherent and random recall. Data is just data, but experiences make data MEAN something. Once computers learn to synthesize information ON THEIR OWN, we better watch out. They're ALMOST there. Hook up sound, sight, smell and intelligence with mobility, and something wonderful (bionics for the physically challenged) can happen or somet
Re: (Score:2)
You are a genius. In case you didn't know your biological nose does the same. It is almost the definition of "nose".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. A breathalyser is not an artifical nose for smelling alcohol.
A person who cannot smell is anosmic, or is an anosmiac.
Re: (Score:2)
--- He goes by the nickname of 'Stinky'.
I thought that's what you called a person who DOES smell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Vision, that's easy, cameras have sharper resolution than our pathetic biological eyes.
I wondered about this, so I decided to look it up. At http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html [clarkvision.com] the writer seems to sum up the topic pretty nicely. It seems that, while our eyes have probably been surpassed by technology when looking at resolution only (think http://www.gigapxl.org/ [gigapxl.org] ), the image processing power of the brain exceeds any of our current technology. I guess our eyes aren't quite obsolete yet. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
What do you think natural "nose" tech does?
Re: (Score:2)
paper abstract [ieee.org]
Old news? (Score:5, Interesting)
I seem to remember something about they discovered the material being tested for aircraft use until they realised that the strong odours of a busy airport made the properties of the material change, then they put it into an electronic nose. I also remember a demo where the machine detected the difference between "normal" and "rancid" mayonnaise by smell alone.
It seems that this is one of those inventions that just keeps popping up but nobody ever really finds a commercial use for it that can make all the development costs worthwhile.
Re: (Score:1)
When Phillipa was on screen, who cared about the technology?
Re: (Score:1)
True, although Tomorrows World was notorious for two things:
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, a decade at least (Score:3, Informative)
They did commercialise it. The technology is used all over the place.
http://chemse.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/30/suppl_1/i252 [oxfordjournals.org]
http://www.wordspy.com/words/noseonachip.asp [wordspy.com]
Of course, I'm sure Caltech can patent it can sue the bastards into oblivion.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Old and long time commercial. (Score:2)
As seen on CSI: http://www.smithsdetection.com/eng/1383.php [smithsdetection.com]
Caltech - Reinventing the wheel ever since.
Re:Old news? (Score:4, Informative)
Am I the only person (in the UK) who saw the Tomorrow's World back in the days of Phillipa Forester or earlier where they had something IDENTICAL to this and were "on the verge" of commercialising it.
This is in fact old news. The first publication from this research group regarding chemical sensing was in 1995. I don't think any major breakthroughs have been made recently.
See http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/92/7/2652 [pnas.org]
That's not to say it isn't interesting - I have experience in the chemical sensing field so I think it's cool - but it's definitely not news.
Re: (Score:2)
http://electrochem.cwru.edu/ed/encycl/art-n01-nose.htm [cwru.edu]
And that was a miniaturized, improved one of one that they had built in the 1970s that was about 3 meters long. From what I remember from that tour, what's happened over the years is increasing miniaturization, better sensor arrays and better algorithms for identifying substances. B
Re: (Score:2)
As some of the other posts indicate, there have been a few approaches to building electronic noses. Another one worth mentioning is the "Karlsruhe Micro-Nose" [www.fzk.de] (PDF, English on pages 3–4) which uses an array measuring conductivity over a temperature gradient, resulting in sensoric fingerprints for different smells (see the examples on page 4).
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.scensive.com/ [scensive.com]
Yes, old news (Score:2)
Reading TFA, I didn't see any info in the article that was different from what I saw presented a decade ago. I'm sure they've improved the e-nose a ton in th
Hold it in (Score:3, Funny)
Smellin' Llewellyn... (Score:2)
But... (Score:1, Redundant)
It would depend... (Score:2)
How does it smell? (Score:2, Funny)
AWFUL!
Re: (Score:1)
CalTech Creates Electronic Nose.... (Score:1)
Medical applications (Score:5, Interesting)
for the interested: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/01/0112_060112_dog_cancer.html [nationalgeographic.com]
Obligatory (Score:2)
"How does it smell?"
"Terrible!"
Robot Rhinotillexis & Rhinoplasty.... (Score:1)
"You can pick your friends, you can pick your nose, but you can't pick your friend's nose." -Unknown
Now they can build the Smelloscope (Score:3, Funny)
LEELA: I don't get it.
PROFESSOR FARNSWORTH: I'm sorry, Fry, but astronomers renamed Uranus in 2620 to end that stupid joke once and for all.
FRY: Oh. What's it called now?
PROFESSOR FARNSWORTH: Urectum.
Re: (Score:2)
Leela: Anything yet, professor?
Professor Hubert Farnsworth: I'm afraid the Smelloscope can't locate Bender. His fragrance is too mild. It's being overwhelmed by local sources.
[Everyone looks at Zoidberg]
Dr. Zoidberg: Hooray! Now I'm the center of attention.
One step closer to Lt Cmr Data (Score:3, Interesting)
And if the reactions are driven to motors which could move body parts, then we are one step closer to making an android.
Electronic Noise (Score:3, Funny)
Michael Jackson (Score:1)
Can it smell Cancer (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It'd be interesting to see if this can be replicated and used as a medical device.
It's been done. In most cases the dogs are still far more sensitive, but in some cases the device is still sensitive enough. One exception is detection of biogenic amines, which are markers for kidney failure among other things. For those, specific types of sensors are actually more sensitive than the dogs by a fair margin.
The bad news (Score:2)
The ball's in MIT's court. (Score:2)
Roomba manners (Score:1)
CSI? (Score:1)
Something similar (Score:3, Informative)
Not original (Score:1)
I think you may be missing a step here around... (Score:2)
if ((sensor1 > 25)&&(sensor2 > 75))
{
substance1detected = TRUE;
}
if (substance1detected)
{
substancearray[1]++;
}
call DumpSubtanceList(substancearray);
What's with all the overly-hopeful anthropomorphization lately on Slashdot? I thought this place was more geared toward IT professionals than those likely to be impressed with hype targeting the general public.
Yes, but... (Score:1)
So tell me... (Score:1)
Oh. No *i*, see? (Score:1)
Unwired Input (Score:3, Funny)
Real questions... (Score:1)
Now I do not mean to underestimate what was achieved, but the problems we had when I was studying the matter was principally one of sensor drift over time. You can slap a bunch of gas sensors together, study their various reactions to various "odor" stimulus,
meh. (Score:2)
I think they've developed a nose since then, but can't find a good link.
Electronic or Organic (Score:2)
we have found a witch, may we burn her? (Score:1)
Eletronic COCAINE!!! (Score:1)
Bad Idea (Score:2)
Dave: "For cry'n out loud Steve, what the hell did you eat!?"
Nose 9000: "Sorry Dave, it wasn't Steve, I have traced the odor trail back to your buttocks."
Dave: "What? How!?"
Nose 9000: "Even though you tried to fan it and walk away from it I was able to pinpoint the sound too."
Hygene (Score:1)
Patent question (Score:2)
Is it secure? Can it be picked? (Score:3, Funny)
Finally (Score:2)
Think of the possibilities... (Score:2)
High School bathrooms that do the same with tobacco.
I want to put a budget one outside my window to turn on a light when it detects my friendly neighborhood skunk (skunks don't like the light)-- as he rather likes the grubs that hang out in the patch of moss under my window. Right now when I'm woken up at 3AM by the pungent smell, I have to turn on the light manually...
But... (Score:2)
</obscurereference>
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
(as my son gleefully informed us the other day)
Re: (Score:1)
____
I'll wait for the inexpensive fart detector to tell the dealer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude! You're getting a fart!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)