Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40249484›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2025

Predictive Machine Learning Models for Olfaction.

Prantar Dutta, Deepak Jain, Rakesh Gupta, Beena Rai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Prantar DuttaPhysical Sciences Research Area, TCS Research, Tata Consultancy Services, Pune, India.
Deepak JainPhysical Sciences Research Area, TCS Research, Tata Consultancy Services, Pune, India. deepak.jain3@tcs.com.
Rakesh GuptaPhysical Sciences Research Area, TCS Research, Tata Consultancy Services, Pune, India.
Beena RaiPhysical Sciences Research Area, TCS Research, Tata Consultancy Services, Pune, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A classical problem in neuroscience, biology, and chemistry is linking the chemical structure of odorants to their olfactory perception. This difficulty arises from the subjective nature of odor perception, incomplete understanding of the physiological mechanisms involved, and the absence of standardized odor descriptions. Machine learning and other computational approaches have recently been applied to tackle this challenge. This chapter presents a comprehensive workflow for constructing machine learning models for odor prediction, covering everything from problem formulation to model evaluation and real-world deployment. We also delve into recent advancements to enhance and interpret data-driven predictions while acknowledging the current limitations. The methodology outlined here offers a valuable framework for synthetic chemists and data scientists, enabling them to address the broader issue of olfaction and cater to specific needs within the fragrance and perfume industries.

Indexed as

Machine LearningOdorantsOlfactory PerceptionSmellComputational BiologyHumansDeep learningMachine learningMolecular modelingOdor predictionOlfaction

Identifiers

PMID40249484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.