MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388557107 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.130508

Identification of Human Survivors in Natural Disasters Through Body Odor Analysis

2023· article· en· W4388557107 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joanie B. Houinsou, Kokou M. Assogba, Roland C. Houessouvo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Natural (archaeology)Natural disasterPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsOdorSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthInjury preventionForensic engineeringMedical emergencyEngineeringPsychologyMedicineGeographyBiologyEcologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our research addresses the critical challenge of identifying and locating survivors during natural disasters, focusing on the innovative application of body odor analysis.Natural disasters, like earthquakes, demand rapid rescue efforts.Traditionally, canine teams have played a pivotal role, but our study proposes a novel approach using volatile organic compounds (VOCs) found in body odor as biometric markers.We created a comprehensive simulation model based on existing scientific literature, utilizing advanced data resampling techniques and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) alongside clustering methods.Our findings demonstrate convincingly that VOC analysis effectively distinguishes and pinpoints individuals in disaster scenarios.This research opens a new avenue for practical implementation.In summary, our study highlights the promise of VOC-based body odor analysis as a groundbreaking solution for identifying and locating human survivors during natural disasters.This innovation holds significant potential for enhancing disaster response strategies and ultimately saving lives.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207