MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Monitoring of food spoilage with electronic nose: potential applications for smart homes

2009· article· en· W2044626569 on OpenAlexaff
Geoffrey C. Green, Adrian D. C. Chan, Rafik Goubran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronic noseFood spoilageComputer scienceHome automationLiving spaceAssisted livingNoseWork (physics)Risk analysis (engineering)EngineeringTelecommunicationsBusinessMedicineArtificial intelligenceBiologyGerontologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In ambient-assisted living environments, advanced sensors are used to detect potential problems that may affect the occupant. For a range of unsafe living conditions, characteristic odours arise that can provide early warning of a problem in the dwelling. In this paper, we investigate the concept of smell monitoring in the smart home environment, with particular attention paid to food spoilage. Using a commercially available electronic nose (e-nose) based on a metal-oxide sensor array, the odours associated with five common foods were captured over a seven day period. All foods were readily discriminated at the beginning of the measurement period. However, as the food spoiled, the odour profiles changed significantly. In several cases, the changes for a given food exhibited a clear trajectory in the PCA space. This preliminary work suggests that e-nose technology is a promising candidate for incorporation in the smart home. For widespread adoption, however, future e-nose development must continue to improve current shortcomings such as instability, user intervention, and high cost.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207