Javascript must be enabled to continue!
On the dimensionality of olfactory space
View through CrossRef
Abstract
We recently presented an estimate of the number of mutually discriminable olfactory stimuli at one trillion (
1
). Subjects were asked to sniff mixtures of molecules with increasing component overlap selected from a panel of 128 isointense structurally and perceptually diverse monomolecular odorants (
2
). We considered stimulus pairs discriminable when the majority of subjects could significantly discriminate them at p=0.05, a conventional statistical threshold given our sample size. From these empirical data, we estimated that human discriminative capacity exceeds one trillion olfactory stimuli. Several readers have pointed out that such extrapolations are sensitive to underlying assumptions about the chosen significance threshold (
3
) and the dimensionality of olfaction (
4
). It is important to note that any exponential function will be sensitive in this way, and the goal of our model was not to identify the exact number of discriminable olfactory stimuli, or even the exact mathematical bounds, but an estimate of the order of magnitude of human discriminatory power across a population of human subjects. This was not clearly stated in our paper, and we agree that contradictory references to a “lower limit” and an “upper bound” were confusing. The central argument in (
4
) is that our estimation method assumes that the dimensionality of olfactory space is large. We agree that the high-dimensional nature of olfaction is indeed an assumption, and we should have stated this explicitly in our paper (
1
). Even if we follow this logic of the models presented in (
4
), purely geometrical calculations show that our results hold if the dimensionality of olfactory representations is D≥25. The dimensionality of olfaction is a question of interest to everyone, and while we do not know for sure, all available evidence suggests that olfaction is a high-dimensional sense. The olfactory system is wired to keep information from the ~400 odorant receptors strictly separated, so it is plausible that olfaction operates at least in 400-dimensional space. This is an important topic of discussion in olfaction, and we welcome continued debate of the dimensionality of smell and how this impacts human olfactory perception.
Title: On the dimensionality of olfactory space
Description:
Abstract
We recently presented an estimate of the number of mutually discriminable olfactory stimuli at one trillion (
1
).
Subjects were asked to sniff mixtures of molecules with increasing component overlap selected from a panel of 128 isointense structurally and perceptually diverse monomolecular odorants (
2
).
We considered stimulus pairs discriminable when the majority of subjects could significantly discriminate them at p=0.
05, a conventional statistical threshold given our sample size.
From these empirical data, we estimated that human discriminative capacity exceeds one trillion olfactory stimuli.
Several readers have pointed out that such extrapolations are sensitive to underlying assumptions about the chosen significance threshold (
3
) and the dimensionality of olfaction (
4
).
It is important to note that any exponential function will be sensitive in this way, and the goal of our model was not to identify the exact number of discriminable olfactory stimuli, or even the exact mathematical bounds, but an estimate of the order of magnitude of human discriminatory power across a population of human subjects.
This was not clearly stated in our paper, and we agree that contradictory references to a “lower limit” and an “upper bound” were confusing.
The central argument in (
4
) is that our estimation method assumes that the dimensionality of olfactory space is large.
We agree that the high-dimensional nature of olfaction is indeed an assumption, and we should have stated this explicitly in our paper (
1
).
Even if we follow this logic of the models presented in (
4
), purely geometrical calculations show that our results hold if the dimensionality of olfactory representations is D≥25.
The dimensionality of olfaction is a question of interest to everyone, and while we do not know for sure, all available evidence suggests that olfaction is a high-dimensional sense.
The olfactory system is wired to keep information from the ~400 odorant receptors strictly separated, so it is plausible that olfaction operates at least in 400-dimensional space.
This is an important topic of discussion in olfaction, and we welcome continued debate of the dimensionality of smell and how this impacts human olfactory perception.
Related Results
Olfactory Bulb Volume for Prognosis in Olfactory Loss
Olfactory Bulb Volume for Prognosis in Olfactory Loss
ObjectiveThe olfactory bulb (OB) is essential for olfactory perception, and its volume is correlated to the olfactory function in normal and pathologic cases. We hypothesized that ...
Early olfactory fiber projections and cell migration into the rat telencephalon
Early olfactory fiber projections and cell migration into the rat telencephalon
AbstractThe formation and development of primary olfactory axons was studied in the rat embryo using acetylcholinesterase histochemistry, immunocytochemistry for neuron‐specific β‐...
Retronasal and Orthonasal Olfactory Function in Relation to Olfactory Bulb Volume in Patients With Posttraumatic Loss of Smell
Retronasal and Orthonasal Olfactory Function in Relation to Olfactory Bulb Volume in Patients With Posttraumatic Loss of Smell
AbstractObjective: The aims of this study were to evaluate olfactory function with orthonasal and retronasal testing in patients with posttraumatic olfactory loss and to investigat...
Quantifying peripheral modulation of olfaction by trigeminal agonists
Quantifying peripheral modulation of olfaction by trigeminal agonists
Abstract
In the mammalian nose, two chemosensory systems, the trigeminal and the olfactory mediate the detection of volatile chemicals. Most odor...
Morphological Indicators of Olfactory Capability in Wobbegong Sharks (Orectolobidae, Elasmobranchii)
Morphological Indicators of Olfactory Capability in Wobbegong Sharks (Orectolobidae, Elasmobranchii)
Elasmobranchs are thought to possess an acute sense of smell, but the relationship between the anatomy of their olfactory organs and their sensory ecology is poorly understood. Mor...
Olfactory fossa of Tremacebus harringtoni (platyrrhini, early Miocene, Sacanana, Argentina): Implications for activity pattern
Olfactory fossa of Tremacebus harringtoni (platyrrhini, early Miocene, Sacanana, Argentina): Implications for activity pattern
AbstractCT imaging was undertaken on the skull of ∼ 20‐Myr‐old Miocene Tremacebus harringtoni. Here we report our observations on the relative size of the olfactory fossa and its i...
Organization and distribution of glomeruli in the bowhead whale olfactory bulb
Organization and distribution of glomeruli in the bowhead whale olfactory bulb
Although modern baleen whales still possess a functional olfactory systems that includes olfactory bulbs, cranial nerve I and olfactory receptor genes, their olfactory capabilities...
Olfactory Dysfunction following COVID-19 and the Potential Benefits of Olfactory Training
Olfactory Dysfunction following COVID-19 and the Potential Benefits of Olfactory Training
COVID-19 is associated with a common symptom of olfactory dysfunction, which may persist even after the infection is resolved. Olfactory training (OT) has emerged as the most effec...

