Startup Uses Sensor Networks To Debug Science Experiments (xconomy.com)
gthuang88 writes: Environmental factors like temperature, humidity, or lighting often derail life science experiments. Now Elemental Machines, a startup from the founders of Misfit Wearables, is trying to help scientists debug experiments using distributed sensors and machine-learning software to detect anomalies. The product is in beta testing with academic labs and biotech companies. The goal is to help speed up things like biology research and drug development. Wiring up experiments is part of a broader effort to create "smart labs" that automate some of the scientific process.
So a bunch of hipster college dropouts in San Francisco are going to save the scientific method from SCIENTISTS with IoT and DSP/Machine Learning hocus-pocus?
This should be entertaining!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCIgen
I'm in the physical sciences, and even there am met with continuing reluctance of graduate students to take thorough lab notes in a lab book.
It is not that hard to write, "It's humid today," or whatever. No matter how mundane the variable is, and no matter how fucking smart you think you are –with your imagined ability of total recall even a few months after the lab-time, everything is worth writing down.
That way, when an anomalous result appears, they can search their notes for possible causes. Instead, they spend their time on FaceBook while the expensive instruments spit out Results – Results which all-too-often have inexplicable scatter in measurements of the variable-of-interest.
BTW, I teach at a Global top-10 Sci-Eng University. The grad students' 'arrogance issues' seem to increase the further up the chain of Universities one goes. These kids resist direction like mad, and as a result, will never become world-class engineers or scientists.
If the results of your experiment were significantly changed by the surrounding air's humidity, the ambient temperature, or a breeze in the room, then the experiment was not designed at all correctly. The whole idea of designing an experiment is to focus the perturbations on a small set of variables AND eliminate the other confounding variables. If you can't design an experiment, no gadget or start-up company can save your ass.
This sort of thing has always been available for pharmaceutical manufacturing, but has been long overlooked on the research side. I've been at a few science research based engineering companies that collect this kind of data already, but don't do anything to analyse it unless something catastrophic happens. A software tool that could enable visualization of this data across experiments will extremely valuable as we remove technician to technician variation (via robotics) and a synthetic biology becomes more common place, and could prove as invaluable as well plate edge effect analysis already included in major bio-analysis software packages such as spotfire.
I read TFA and it struck me that this is the invention of salesmen who are working very hard to find a rationale for their product. The two examples they came up with, where the benefits of their system are supposed to be maximally evident, are just not convincing. In the case of the mice who are kept awake at night: Wouldn't the test group and the control group of mice both be equally affected by the noise? If the thing being tested for really was making a difference, shouldn't that difference still be visible? This sounds an awful lot like: We went into the experiment knowing what results we wanted, and we twiddled knobs and kept discarding "bad" data under the thinnest pretenses, until we finally got them. And that's not how you do science.
When it comes to the researchers whose polymer was being degraded by UV photons from normal daylight... I'm sorry, they just don't sound very smart. I have to wonder if their situation would have improved if they had installed this monitoring system. What would it have told them? "Your experiment is occurring at room temperature, earth gravity, normal daylight, air of terrestrial composition, yadda yadda." Are the salesmen suggesting that these bumbling scientists would have looked at all this "data", slapped their foreheads and yelled: BY GOD, WE JUST LEARNED THAT OUR EXPERIMENT IS OCCURRING IN NORMAL DAYLIGHT!