Performance of a Novel Electronic Nose for the Detection of Volatile Organic Compounds Relating to Starvation or Human Decomposition Post-Mass Disaster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a recent increase in the frequency of mass disaster events. Following these events, the rapid location of victims is paramount. Currently, the most reliable search method is scent detection dogs, which use their sense of smell to locate victims accurately and efficiently. Despite their efficacy, they have limited working times, can give false positive responses, and involve high costs. Therefore, alternative methods for detecting volatile compounds are needed, such as using electronic noses (e-noses). An e-nose named the 'NOS.E' was developed and has been used successfully to detect VOCs released from human remains in an open-air environment. However, the system's full capabilities are currently unknown, and therefore, this work aimed to evaluate the NOS.E to determine the efficacy of detection and expected sensor response. This was achieved using analytical standards representative of known human ante-mortem and decomposition VOCs. Standards were air diluted in Tedlar gas sampling bags and sampled using the NOS.E. This study concluded that the e-nose could detect and differentiate a range of VOCs prevalent in ante-mortem and decomposition VOC profiles, with an average LOD of 7.9 ppm, across a range of different chemical classes. The NOS.E was then utilized in a simulated mass disaster scenario using donated human cadavers, where the system showed a significant difference between the known human donor and control samples from day 3 post-mortem. Overall, the NOS.E was advantageous: the system had low detection limits while offering portability, shorter sampling times, and lower costs than dogs and benchtop analytical instruments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".