Body Position-Dependent Shift in Odor Percept Present Only for Perithreshold Odors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We recently demonstrated that a supine position causes a decrease in olfactory sensitivity compared with an upright position. We pursued that initial finding in 3 separate experiments in which we explored the extent of, and mechanism underlying, this phenomenon. In Experiment 1, we replicated the decrease in olfactory sensitivity when in a supine compared with an upright position. In Experiment 2, we measured body position-dependent shifts in physiological variables and sniff measures while smelling suprathreshold odorants and performing a perithreshold odor intensity discrimination task. Olfactory performances were reduced while supine. However, no relationships between the shift in olfactory performances and either the physiological variables or sniff measures were found. In Experiment 3, we determined that there were no position-dependent shifts in ability to discriminate or identify suprathreshold odors or rate them for pleasantness, intensity, or familiarity. However, a drop in scores was observed, and performance was slowed, on a cognitive skill while supine. These results demonstrate a body position-dependent shift in olfactory sensitivity only for perithreshold odors that appears to be mediated by cognitive rather than physiological factors. Implications for olfactory imaging studies are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".