Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37939067›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Perceptual metrics for odorants: Learning from non-expert similarity feedback using machine learning.

Priyadarshini Kumari, Tarek Besold, Michael Spranger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Priyadarshini KumariSony AI, Sunnyvale, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4732-0920
Tarek BesoldSony AI, Barcelona, Spain.
Michael SprangerSony AI, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Defining perceptual similarity metrics for odorant comparisons is crucial to understanding the mechanism of olfactory perception. Current methods in olfaction rely on molecular physicochemical features or discrete verbal descriptors (floral, burnt, etc.) to approximate perceptual (dis)similarity between odorants. However, structural or verbal descriptors alone are limited in modeling complex nuances of odor perception. While structural features inadequately characterize odor perception, language-based discrete descriptors lack the granularity needed to model a continuous perception space. We introduce data-driven approaches to perceptual metrics learning (PMeL) based on two key insights: a) by combining physicochemical features with the user's perceptual feedback, we can leverage both structural and perceptual attributes of odors to define dissimilarity, and b) instead of discrete labels, user's perceptual feedback can be gathered as relative similarity comparisons, such as "Does molecule-A smell more like molecule-B, or molecule-C?" These triplet comparisons are easier even for non-experts users and offer a more effective representation of the continuous perception space. Experimental results on several defined tasks show the effectiveness of our approach in evaluating perceptual dissimilarity between odorants. Finally, we investigate how closely our model, trained on non-expert feedback, aligns with the expert's similarity judgments. Our effort aims to reduce reliance on expert annotations.

Indexed as

OdorantsOlfactory PerceptionFeedbackMachine LearningSmell

Identifiers

PMID37939067
PMCPMC10631653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.