↓ Skip to main content

Predicting Odor Pleasantness with an Electronic Nose

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting Odor Pleasantness with an Electronic Nose
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, April 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000740
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rafi Haddad, Abebe Medhanie, Yehudah Roth, David Harel, Noam Sobel

Abstract

A primary goal for artificial nose (eNose) technology is to report perceptual qualities of novel odors. Currently, however, eNoses primarily detect and discriminate between odorants they previously "learned". We tuned an eNose to human odor pleasantness estimates. We then used the eNose to predict the pleasantness of novel odorants, and tested these predictions in naïve subjects who had not participated in the tuning procedure. We found that our apparatus generated odorant pleasantness ratings with above 80% similarity to average human ratings, and with above 90% accuracy at discriminating between categorically pleasant or unpleasant odorants. Similar results were obtained in two cultures, native Israeli and native Ethiopian, without retuning of the apparatus. These findings suggest that unlike in vision and audition, in olfaction there is a systematic predictable link between stimulus structure and stimulus pleasantness. This goes in contrast to the popular notion that odorant pleasantness is completely subjective, and may provide a new method for odor screening and environmental monitoring, as well as a critical building block for digital transmission of smell.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Costa Rica 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 149 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 16%
Researcher 25 15%
Student > Master 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Professor 10 6%
Other 36 22%
Unknown 32 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 27 16%
Engineering 22 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 13%
Neuroscience 12 7%
Chemistry 9 5%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 42 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,187,979
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#968
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,685
of 102,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#4
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 102,788 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.