Paper detail

Noise enhances odor source localization

We address the problem of inferring the location of a target that releases odor in the presence of turbulence. Input for the inference is provided by many sensors scattered within the odor plume. Drawing inspiration from distributed chemosensation in biology, we ask whether the accuracy of the inference is affected by proprioceptive noise, i.e., noise on the perceived location of the sensors. Surprisingly, in the presence of a net fluid flow, proprioceptive noise improves Bayesian inference, rather than degrading it. An optimal noise exists that efficiently leverages additional information hidden within the geometry of the odor plume. Empirical tuning of noise functions well across a range of distances and may be implemented in practice. Other sources of noise also improve accuracy, owing to their ability to break the spatiotemporal correlations of the turbulent plume. These counterintuitive benefits of noise may be leveraged to improve sensory processing in biology and robotics.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.