188
Why this $10 spectrometer chip could bring real-time chemical sensing to wearables (phys.org)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 18 points 5 months ago (3 children)

The writing in the linked article is a little weird, as others have pointed out. However the journal publication is very cool. If this is reproducible, it'll likely have a noticeable impact over the next 10 years or so. We won't see $10 spectrometers, but we might see handheld ones in a similar format to the cheap IR cameras.

Here's the link for anyone interested.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41566-026-01891-6

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    If you're familiar with this kind of stuff, do you think this could lead to cheaper and smaller hyperspectral cameras?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    This technology isn't for generating images but for measuring what frequencies are present in light.

    I'm not 100% sure on the specifics, but it sounds like they are using some mathematical properties of fourier transformations to either broaden the frequency response of sensors or simplify the math required to get the final result.

    Hyperspectral cameras are designed to generate images from a matrix of light sensors.

    This could maybe lead to spectral cameras (as in a camera where each pixel is the spectrum of light in that pixel), which could then generate images of arbitrary spectra, but I suspect that this sensor is still quite a bit larger than the sensors used in digital cameras these days. Even a hyperspectral camera doesn't really care about what frequencies it measures, it's just able to detect differences in amplitude at those frequencies and either doesn't detect outside of that range or has something filtering the light outside of the range before it reaches the sensors.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    From skimming, it sounds like they're trying to use compressive sensing techniques, but push the "compute" to a physical, optical structure. That gives you a smaller device without the expensive compute (or the concern about losing data from random noise).

    In general, it's not hard to make a basic optical spectrometer. Most people have seen a prism splitting light into a rainbow. Imagine that plus an array of light sensing pixels. The light intensity on the array is your spectrum reading. The further away you put your pixel array, the more spread apart the colors in your rainbow, but the less light hits each individual pixel.

    Optical spectrometers generally use diffraction gratings instead of prisms, but the trade-offs are the same. Longer optical path -> more spectral resolution -> more expensive light sensors.

    Compressive sensing tries to break that trade-off by using math from information theory to get a usable data from fewer measurements. The single pixel camera is a great intro to the field. You use a single photodiode plus a series of known masks to take a series of measurements. From the masks + single pixel measurements, you can reconstruct the original image. There's probably code out there to do it virtually if anyone's interested. IIRC, to do a virtual measurement, you apply the mask to your image, then sum up the values. The reconstruction process is then identical to if you had real measurements.

    For the $10 spectrometer, it sounds like they're pushing some of that "compute" to a tunable optical system. In other words, the device "takes compressive sensing measurements," but it does some of the reconstruction before it hits the light sensor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent