ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring the feasibility of olfactory brain-computer interfaces.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High-Accuracy Detection of Odor Presence from Olfactory Bulb Local Field Potentials via Deep Neural Networks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we explore the feasibility of single-trial predictions of odor registration in the brain using olfactory bio-signals. We focus on two main aspects: input data modality and the processing model. For the first time, we assess the predictability of odor registration from novel electrobulbogram (EBG) recordings, both in sensor and source space, and compare these with commonly used electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. Despite having fewer data channels, EBG shows comparable performance to EEG. We also examine whether breathing patterns contain relevant information for this task. By comparing a logistic regression classifier, which requires hand-crafted features, with an end-to-end convolutional deep neural network, we find that end-to-end approaches can be as effective as classic methods. However, due to the high dimensionality of the data, the current dataset is insufficient for either classifier to robustly differentiate odor and non-odor trials. Finally, we identify key challenges in olfactory BCIs and suggest future directions for improving odor detection systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.