11 September 2003 The great chemical residue detection debate: dog versus machine
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Many engineering groups desire to construct instrumentation to replace dog-handler teams in identifying and localizing chemical mixtures. This goal requires performance specifications for an “artificial dog-handler team”. Progress toward generating such specifications from laboratory tests of dog-handler teams has been made recently at the Sensory Research Institute, and the method employed is amenable to the measurement of tasks representative of the decision-making that must go on when such teams solve problems in actual (and therefore informationally messy) situations. As progressively more quantitative data are obtained on progressively more complex odor tasks, the boundary conditions of dog-handler performance will be understood in great detail. From experiments leading to this knowledge, one ca develop, as we do in this paper, a taxonomy of test conditions that contain various subsets of the variables encountered in “real world settings”. These tests provide the basis for the rigorous testing that will provide an improved basis for deciding when biological sensing approaches (e.g. dog-handler teams) are best and when “artificial noses” are most valuable.
© (2003) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Alan C. Tripp, Alan C. Tripp, James C. Walker, James C. Walker, } "The great chemical residue detection debate: dog versus machine", Proc. SPIE 5089, Detection and Remediation Technologies for Mines and Minelike Targets VIII, (11 September 2003); doi: 10.1117/12.485637; https://doi.org/10.1117/12.485637
PROCEEDINGS
8 PAGES


SHARE
Back to Top