Talk:Machine olfaction

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Machine olfaction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070714163452/http://www.scensive.com:80/ to http://www.scensive.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

sources for name spellings (Wilkens/Wikens, Hartman/Harman, etc)

I'm just listing below the reference works I used to find the (hopefully) correct spellings of, and first name initials for, some of the names in the article. (I don't have time at the moment to turn them into citations, and also I suspect that that's beyond the scope of mere copyediting anyway.)

Montcrieff:

• https://www.amazon.com/Artificial-Fibres-R-W-Moncrieff/dp/B001AGNASC

Wilkens & Hartman:

• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3859118/#b23-sensors-13-14214
• https://books.google.com.au/books?id=a_Z1DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA301&lpg=PA301&dq=j+d+hartman+nose&source=bl&ots=gPWMJ4P-Ob&sig=8IVXR0SnRSESiuctdy5PsB2-iPs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiXv63gtdffAhVUUN4KHQlfAiwQ6AEwC3oECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q=buck&f=false
• https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/13/10/14214/htm (also mentions a T.M. Buck having been involved in the 1964 r&d)

--Philologia (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Items needing expert attention - January 2019

triangulation versus trliteration [sic - editor seems to have meant "trilateration" per below]

One section in the article talks about triangulation. But, the math refers to using the radius from each center, which is a technique known as trilateration. Triangulation would be the approach used if you had three relative angles.

Branciforte3241 (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Copyeditor's note: I just moved this from the top of the page (and made the "sic" edit in the heading) so that it could be included under the current heading.--Philologia (talk) 10:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm not an expert, but ...

The algorithm shows using trilateration to generate three radii, which point roughly towards the source.

These radii are then used to calculate the bounding sides of an area of interest (black area).

In the example given, you can see that the radii would intersect, and that would give a triangulated point.

In the pic, the area is used, so it is trilateration, not triangulation.

Indeed, many TV shows are mistaken and state "triangulation from the antenna", but cell phones and towers use trilateration.Chaosdruid (talk) 14:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

time series kernel methods

Is this the kernel referred to here please? and is this the time series referred to?

Thanks in advance. --Philologia (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

"time series kernel methods", might be better written as "time-series kernal-methods"

Time-series data is evaluated by a kernal-method; the "kernal method" is the process algorithm used to base the next action on, the kernal works out what to do next based on the time-series data. [more explanation https://arxiv.org/pdf/1306.1913.pdf]

The kernal is this kernal method

and the time series is this time-series

More importantly, that material is in the lead/lede. It should only be in the lead if it is the body of the article (as the lead is a summary of the article, when the article is not a stub). I cannot see it anywhere in the body of the article, so copying it to lower in the article should be done so that it IS in the body as well Chaosdruid (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

qualitative or quantitative?

Is "qualitative profile" (below) definitely right or should it perhaps be quantitative?

"The entire system is a means of converting complex sensor responses into a qualitative profile of the volatile (or complex mixture of chemical volatiles) that makes (or make) up a smell, in the form of an output.

Conventional electronic noses are not analytical instruments in the classical sense and very few claim to be able to quantify an odor."

--Philologia (talk) 19:18, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

which "dynamic equation"?

In this context, is it one of these (which can then be linked) please:

• difference equation in discrete time
• differential equation in continuous time
• time scale calculus in combined discrete and continuous time

?
Thanks--Philologia (talk) 12:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

links - request for check

Could someone knowledgable in the subject please let me know whether these links are correct?

• 2nd para: "However, a critical element in the development of these instruments is pattern analysis, and the successful design of a pattern analysis system for machine olfaction requires a careful consideration of the various issues involved in processing multivariate data: signal-preprocessing, feature extraction, feature selection, classification, regression, clustering, and validation"
  • "regression" => Regression_analysis?
  • "validation" => one of these [[1]]?
• Subheading: Localization methods, sub-subheading: E. coli algorithm: "A simple tracking method is the E. coli algorithm,[12] which has been observed in the chemotaxis process of E. coli bacteria"
  • "the E. coli algorithm" => Bacterial_colony_optimization
    

Thanks in advance. --Philologia (talk) 12:15, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

"fluid wind"?

Under Turbulence-dominated fluid flow, the phrase "...to deal with the background fluid (wind or water) flow..." occurs. Is there such a thing as fluid wind? --Philologia (talk) 12:36, 6 January 2019 (UTC)