Forum Replies Created

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: SCiO V1.1 !!! #43383

    So… I was searching the online guide, and I saw the “Consumer Physics Models” and I saw some models that are created, and there aren’t in my scio app…


    Looking closely I saw that all of them are Supported Devices:v1.1 or even v1.2 !!! Have I missed something? is there an other version?


    Also I suppose the ones I have in my scio app are previous versions that support the v1.0… and the newer versions models don’t support my scio?


    So again the question a little different: Will the Consumer Physics new models, or even the newest versions of older models, going to support the devices you send us? And are the models that you have already created (and now support v1.1 and v1.2) going to be updated to support the v1.0?

    in reply to: SCiO V1.1 !!! #43381



    I was wondering about the v1.1….

    There is a very big question that no one has asked, and also wasn’t mention by the company:

    How about the apps that the consumerphysics puts out?

    There is no mention for how long there will be v1.0 compatible!

    Yes ok… if the developers want to work with their own apps, there will be no problem, and we can hold on our scio.

    But it will be very helpful (not to mention polite) to have the company say “ok.. all our apps will be v1 compatible so what you bought will not be useless” or “we will have v1 compatibility for 2 years”…




    in reply to: SCiO model inaccuracy & inconsistency #2693


    nice topic!!


    as I see it, there are two points here: a. That the result of a scan is not the same as the label of the problem and b. There is no consistency on the measurement of the same sample.


    The first is easier:

    – Generally the labels of the products give “average values”. That means that the took some samples, measured them and then produced the label. Especially on cheese, I know that the number of samples is quite small, and also the label is printed once a year (or even for more years). So, even if you took the sample to a laboratory, the value probably wont be the same as the label. It is just to give you an idea. This creates also a problem with our sampling. When we collect the samples and give the value that the label says (that probably isn’t a exact value), the model we make isn’t that good. On the other hand, if we collect many many samples, the model will improve (because one label will be higher than the real value, the other will be lower, and they will “correct each other”).


    About the inconsistency:

    – I have also noticed what you mention (different scans with the scio and the sample not moved), but it was with the spectrum. I scanned a liquid (I think it was milk), and the spectrum was different on the right end. After that I noticed that generally the far right end of the spectrum is not so consistence. I can’t imagine what it may be, but because it is toward the end, I think it is (more or less) ok.

    – Now, about the different values that the test gave you… The only thing I can think is the difference of temperature. The collection we have has only one sample at 2oC and then all the other samples 20-24oC. What was the temperature of your sample? I have noticed that the spectrum of the same sample changes in different temperatures. I don’t know if the “Preprocessing Methods (Performs normalization of the signal. This is meant to compensate for changing measurement conditions)” can take that into consideration, but I believe that a correct model should have samples with different temperatures, and the one we are given, doesn’t.


    But also, I don’t understand exactly the results of the measurements. I suppose you don’t mean that between the measurements there was a 1% difference (the first was 20% fat and the second was increased by 1%, that means went to 20.2%). Because this is a very small and normal difference.  If you mean that the first measurement was 20% and the second was 21%. Again it depends on the first value, if it was 3% and went to 4%, it is a very big deal, because it is an increase of 33%. If from 25% went to 26% I believe it is more acceptable 4% increase (taking into consideration also that the model is not the best given).


    I believe that in order to “solve” these questions, we need two things. First, the percentage of confidence for a measurement that the team is working to add to the software. It is necessary for any work. The second is for us to perform tests of the model in lab conditions, with known standards of high purity. When we receive the “SCiO liquid accessory”, I am going to create standards of glucose and BSA protein, and perform detailed measurements.


    Also I would like to mention that many laboratory equipment, designed for specific measurements, also perform (automatically) more than one measurements, and then give as a result a mean value. We can not expect from anything a 100% “correct” result.


    in reply to: Ideas and feedback #2666

    2.3.4. I also haven’t created an app yet, but with the use of the “test model” and as I understand it, no, it not up to us. The models and equations are property of the company, and we don’t have access to them. We give the data, and the “cloud” creates the equations, stores them on the cloud and give back only statistical information about the model itself (like R^2). When someone uses the model, it just gives the result. The result is just “what comes closer from all the possible answers”, so even if you scan gasoline and run it by a model for milk, it will give you the closer answer between “cow”, “goat” or “sheep” milk even if the best answer is a 2% mach. That is also why we also see negative concentrations.

    And because the models are property of the company, it isn’t easy (or maybe it is impossible) to be downloaded for offline use.


    On the other hand, yes, the limits of a method are known to us, because we give the data. So yes, that is up to us.

    If I have understand it wrong, please correct me!

    * All the discussion concerns simple users and developers. I have the impression that researchers have access to more (or all the) information.

    note: Don’t make me wrong. I am exited with scio, but I look how it would be better, and what makes me reluctant to create an app for users.

    in reply to: Phone Problem #2448

    Yes, it needs Android 4.3 or earlier,


    but yesterday I bought a new tablet, taking into consideration the Technical Specs mentioned  (Android 4.3 or later and Bluetooth 4.0). I tried to download the app from the google play, and tells me “This app is incompatible with all of your devices.”


    It is a  Lenovo A80-50 A5500-H with Android 4.4.2 and Bluetooth v4.0

    in reply to: Trying to get a True/False element answer from a model. #2401

    I wanted to say “export” the data, and not “extract”… :whistle:

    in reply to: Trying to get a True/False element answer from a model. #2399

    Every time I write in the forum I feel uneasy, because I haven’t yet received my scio and I don’t know if I haven’t understand something correctly or it is answered when you start working with it. BUT… curiosity! So:


    -following our concerns about the lack of %error (or something like that) in qualitative analysis, I was wondering: At the quantitative apps is there anything more than the % concentration? Does the user know the limits (lower and higher) of the method, or the possible % error?


    – If there isn’t anything extra information at the free apps, at least is there any statistical tool in the SDK?

    In order to develop ANY serious analytical method we need data like loq, lod, standard deviation, correlation coefficients, or at least the repeatability of measurements. Is there any statistical information like that? Or can we extract the data to perform this analysis with other software?


    The good thing is that at least all these are software problems, and it is possible to be solved (add more software tools in the SDK)


    • This reply was modified 8 years, 3 months ago by sakrelaasta.
    in reply to: Trying to get a True/False element answer from a model. #2385

    Oh, this is a huge problem!

    It  makes the qualitative analysis of anything impossible and dangerous.

    It not acceptable to give you the “closest one” without even telling you “how close” it is.

    The model is working fine, but it works fine because we check it with known pills. Knowing how it works, would anyone ever trust it to take an unknown pill?

    in reply to: SCiO mobile lab for PC #1775

    That is a great proposal!!


    Especially in the case of developing models, where a great number of scans is required, and the work is done with the GUI in a pc (if I understand it correctly). It would be very helpful to scan the samples and the results go straight to the SDK.

    in reply to: Mixture of Salt and Sugar … #1757

    This is an interesting problem…
    I think the main question is if the SDK allows you to perform this kind of modifications. To make a measurement with your 3d gizmo only , and then use it as a “blank” an automatically subtract it from all the other scans.
    I haven’t received my scio and software, so I can not test it, but since you have, maybe you could play a little bit with the SDK and see if there is this possibility (and then tell the rest of us!)

    If the software is capable of this kind of processing, then the next step is a small experiment: Scan something more complicate than salt (lets say an aspirin) on black eyeglass cloth, then scan you plastic holder empty (so to have a spectrum to subtract) and in the end the aspirin inside the plastic holder. If in the SDK you can make the subtraction, we will be able to see if the idea works!

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by sakrelaasta.
    in reply to: Categorization of users/data on the database #1658

    to clarify:

    the “general” database that I mentioned above, as I imagine it, it will be open just for the developers and researchers. I just think that it will be very useful for us to have a quick check of an idea if we have access to a great number of random scans.

    It could work in conjunction with the forum. For example if someone has an idea of “Geographic identification agricultural products” he could mention it on the forum, and then the any of the contributors wanted could scan easily 3-4 plants and “throw” the scans in to that “general” database and then the one with the idea could do a quick check to see if there is any potential there.

    in reply to: Categorization of users/data on the database #1655


    I was expecting a mail if someone answered and I haven’t checked. Sorry

    thank you for the answer. That is exactly what I meant. For qualitative analysis, probably is easier to organize it. If someone scan a drug, and his scan is nothing like the other scans of the same drug, you can automatically delete it.
    Quantitative analysis will be tricky! (Good luck!)

    If I understand it correctly each app (yours and other creators’) will have an different database… one specific (for example) about drugs, one for plant leafs etc.Correct?
    Will there be also a “general” database that anyone can scan anything, add description and upload?

    Also, can creators make an app and then choose if its database will be open for everyone to add, or locked and only the creator can add scans?

    I may burned you brain (and sorry for that), but it wasn’t enough to understand the way my crazy brain works!!
    I have thought also what you mention and I agree with you.
    You can understand what I meant if you read Hagai’s answer.
    But lets play that game again and explain again! :yahoo: I have the time.

    I has just asking if we (the users) could choose during the analysis of a sample, if we want the algorithm to take into consideration only some certified contributors or to use all the contributors (that may be not so reliable).

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 7 months ago by sakrelaasta.
    • This reply was modified 8 years, 7 months ago by sakrelaasta.
    in reply to: Raw spectral data format #1422

    Thank you Roger,


    you do a great job, here as you do in the kickstarter comments!!


    I am waiting to receive my developer kit, and now I just look around what the rest of you have to offer. Your attachments give a very nice fist idea of what to expect when we also start working.

    But I have a question:

    Lets limit it to the grapefruit and the cheese (red and blue color). If I understand correctly you have made a number of measurements for each and that is why we see a “pack/group” of lines for each color. Does the software give you any numeric data concerning the deviation? Red line appears to have smaller deviation from blue (in the “processed graph), but do we have a number? I believe it is very important to know this information.


    Thanks a lot



Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)