Source assessmentSupporting
Odorveillance and the Ethics of Robotic Olfaction
Ethics of robotic olfactionAcademic
Assessment outcome
total 3/6 (actionability 1 + authority 1 + currency 1)
Total3/6
Actionability1/2
Authority1/2
Currency1/2
Authorship & scope
Attribution (G4 evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuer authority (evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuers, who it governs, legal force and content are on the full record.
Eligibility gates
G1 · Retrievablepass
Passed in screening.
G2 · AI nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G3 · Governance nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G4 · Attributablepass
Passed in screening.
G5 · In forcepass
Passed in screening.
Scored criteria
Actionability
1/2No rationale recorded.
Regulations should be put in place to restrict the use of diagnostic olfaction technologies to medical institutions or, if made available for public consumption, olfaction devices could be encoded to each individual service user limit ing data collection capabilities.
Authority
1/2No rationale recorded.
IEEE T Echnology and Soc IET y MagazIn E ∕ december 2018
Currency
1/2No rationale recorded.
Classification
Coverage topicEthics of robotic olfaction
PerspectiveAcademic
Lifecycle stage7 Use & impact
Layerboth
GranularityNot recorded