Alex Wright on Smartphone science

Alex Wright writes in the Communications of the ACM about the emergence of many new scientific instruments, built out of ubiquitous smartphones.

A contemporary smartphone has excellent digital cameras, microphones, network connections, twentieth century and a decent display. From these ingredients, people are building apps to do real science. These devices have more computing power and bandwidth than supercomputers, and it costs very little to develop and deploy apps.

Wright’s article makes clear that there is much more than just computing power going on here. These devices have ignited a burst of innovation, developing new ways to tackle sensing and measurement problems.

Smartphones can be augmented (e.g., to focus on tissue samples), and thereby create a very inexpensive alternative to expensive microscopes or spectrographs. Many standard algorithms will run on a phone, and the inexpensive platform has encouraged new algorithms.

Wright barely scratches the surface here.  There are apps for a variety environmental sensing (DNA sequencing (!), microbe populations,  microbe assays, weather, air pollution, particulates,, odors, earthquake detection, food quality, detecting poachers, and wildlife observations (pollinators.  bird watching, bird song, insect song).  There are also apps that are just plain not needed (garden conditions, hair brush, brain computer interfaces ),

“Looking ahead, the next wave of experimentation may have less to do with the instruments themselves and more to do with finding the right pathways to market.” ([1], p. 20)

Initial interest centers on potential money making opportunities, especially biomedical research and medical diagnostics.  But these devices and apps are likely to be available to lay people, for personal health monitoring and citizen science.

It is good when these devices are being developed to rigorous scientific and medical standards. There is a huge difference between a smartphone app that sort of, almost, analyses blood chemistry, and one that generates reliable and valid results. Beyond that, interpreting the results requires actual understanding of what is measured, the limits of the instrument, and what it means.  That’s going to be hard.

I have expressed misgivings about the use of such devices by citizen scientists or the general public.  I have remarked before, simply collecting data is not actually that useful scientifically. It also invites misguided pseudoscicence, if data is not carefully analyzed or misinterpreted.  And, collecting fancy data will only make the wild world of health apps all that much more dangerous.

This will be a major challenge for designers:  how to create powerful tools that are safe and effective in the hands of a non-specialist.  The model shouldn’t be the lab or hospital equipment, but something like a home thermometer. Useful in a fool proof way.

 

1. Alex Wright, Smartphone science. Communications of the ACM, 61 (1):18-20, January 2017. https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2018/1/223882-smartphone-science/fulltext