*Down to fund
Develop an algorithm for a wrist-wearable tracking device that can measure sexual pleasure and orgasm.
Video version of this proposal
95,000 USD
Set up fee for device platform .…. 5,000
One year access to the platform ….. 6,000
20 tracking devices @ 300/device .…. 6,000
One year research coordination (12hrs/week @ 50/hour) …. 31,000
Initial algorithm development (dev & compute resources) ….. 40,000
Recruitment and marketing …. 7,000
Total: 95,000
Sex is one of the most powerful human driving forces, shaping not only our social interactions and efforts towards our appearance, but sometimes our professional aspirations, personal goals, preferences, and identities (whether we are conscious of this or not). People are willing to go to incredible lengths to experience the deep, irreplaceable intimacy of connection with another person. And yet, once we get there, we often do not sufficiently understand what factors actually lead to a positive sexual experience.
The current field of sexual research is sadly lacking in vitality. For example, the Wikipedia entry on sex research in the 21st century is only four sentences long.
In the 1950s, Masters and Johnson were the first researchers to conduct sex research on subjects in the lab, resulting in the well-known “human sexual response cycle” theory. Today, there are some academic institutions (e.g. Kinsey Institute, Sage Lab) and a few independent researchers (e.g. Aella, Simone & Malcolm Collins) studying sexuality. However, experimental trials are rare due to the difficulty of recruiting participants, getting ethical approvals, and obtaining funding for potentially controversial research.
Even when we manage to conduct such studies, a lab environment almost certainly affects the subject’s sexual response. Imagine getting in the mood while hooked up to a vaginal or penile plethysmograph measuring the blood flow to your genitals. There is an opportunity to improve the generalizability of sex research by conducting it in a more realistic environment.
What is missing from sex research today is objectively measured (not self-reported) data that is collected in a naturalistic (non-clinical) setting. We believe that new technology in wearable tracking devices can enable this.
We had the opportunity to borrow a set of wrist-worn tracking devices for a period of several weeks. They are designed for research purposes, so unlike many popular tracking devices on the market, it was possible to access the raw sensor data that was recorded.
We distributed a few of these devices at a (“pop-up city”) conference. We asked people to record their data while engaging in sexual activity (either partnered or solo), and then press a button immediately after orgasm in order to label the event in the data.
In total, we recorded data from 5 different people across 15 sessions of sexual activity and 22 labeled orgasms.
Here is an example of a female participant’s recording of a 30 minute session of sexual activity during which she labeled three orgasms (the red dotted lines). The data are scaled so that they can be displayed on the same chart. It includes PPG sensors, SPO2, acceleration, and heart rate.
Notably, the third orgasm is the only one with a pronounced heart rate spike, although she subjectively felt that she came in each instance. This brings up an issue that will need to be considered – Can we trust the labeling of the data when it's hard for people to tell if they had a "real" orgasm? And how do we define a “real” orgasm? Is it subjective, physiologically objective, or both?
Unfortunately, this example was one of the cleanest data recordings that we got. Due to several issues, including timestamp inaccuracy, inconsistent columns, and erroneous button presses, most of the data was too messy to include in statistical modeling.
Although it did not result in much usable data, this pilot trial was very informative about how we can do better next time. We need a more reliable tool that can record raw biometric data with high frequency and accuracy. We also require an easy and accurate mechanism for labeling orgasms. (This is in no way a criticism of our partners, since the circumstances were such that they were unable to prepare the devices as they normally would. We thank them for graciously offering us free use of their devices.)
We need to go back to data collection, making sure we can collect biometric data with consistent columns across reporters, try to debug the timestamp issues, and see if we can use a better mechanism to record button presses. We would also ask for some baseline data from the participants, doing normal things that are not sex, to provide a comparison.
We should also refine our analysis by exploring heart rate patterns in greater detail. Specifically, we can estimate the curvature of the heart rate, developing a synthetic indicator that reflects the quick rise and fall. This is a commonly used technique in financial modeling. Early observations suggest that high heart rate combined with a significant negative heart rate curvature may correlate with orgasm, but we need to confirm this with more data.
Additionally, it would be beneficial to upgrade our hardware to capture individual heartbeats continuously, rather than relying on step function data, to enhance the accuracy and granularity of our findings. We have already discussed with another hardware provider that we believe will fit the bill for the requirements of this initiative.
Set up fee for device platform .…. 5,000
One year access to the platform ….. 6,000
20 tracking devices @ 300/device .…. 6,000
One year research coordination (12hrs/week @ 50/hour) …. 31,000
Initial algorithm development (dev & compute resources) ….. 40,000
Recruitment and marketing …. 7,000
Total: 95,000
I (Maia) am the founder of Cosimo Research, a scientific research service that investigates unconventional topics that are not addressed by traditional institutions. Cosimo is deeply integrated with the DeSci community through partnerships with ResearchHub, Biohacker DAO, and DeScier, and I participate in many DeSci events such as Vitalia, Edge Lanna, Edge Esmeralda, and DeSci London.
We have already conducted two novel scientific studies in the field of sex and human attraction – one on vabbing (using one’s vaginal fluid as perfume to attract men) and one on potential sources of male pheromones.
I am highly passionate about the development of this new technology which would allow us to expand our groundbreaking sex research in exciting new directions. I truly believe that it could revolutionize humanity’s scientific understanding of sexual pleasure. I love talking about this project, so please reach out with any questions. <3
Votes from the Nouniverse ⌐◨-◨
Every $NOGS holder now has a voice in deciding how the NOGS pool of Nouns votes on each Nouns proposal.
Cast your vote on your Noggles Dashboard, earn more $NOGS and spread the ⌐◨-◨
FOR: 11.96M $NOGS
AGAINST: 977.88M $NOGS
227520 $NOGS have been shared among the voters.
Screams peak Nounish energy. It’s bold, unconventional, and bound to spark some chatter. We're not just funding research; we’re backing something that makes people stop and ask, "Wait, Nouns funded what?" Perfect, right? It’s a killer way to plant Nouns firmly in DeSci while flexing our "we’re not afraid to get weird" muscles. Open-source docs mean it’s not a one-off either. This thing has legs for future collabs and visibility. Honestly, this proposal is too good for us to pass up. Let’s embrace the chaos.
Like the idea of desci and definitely this research falls in wtf of nouns giving an interesting element but as it is lacks a bit of involvement imo with nouns given its natural flexibility that could be capitalized and not just as distant patreons
Although the research is interesting, I don't think this is a good fit for nouns.
Although the research is interesting, I don't think this is a good fit for nouns.
Would love to see a DeSci Round. Cautious about one off proposals that we don’t have much framing to compare with
This is a story I want to tell, just like the frog, and I think it's weird enough in a way we like, but I do agree with some voters that it should be somehow open-source. Also, I would be much happier to vote for a revised version around $50K. Shoutout to Carlos for onboarding Maia!
FOR - 1 VOTES
AGAINST - 8 VOTES
ABSTAINS - 6 VOTES
Agree with this vwr, unsure about reach here for the cost... I think in the past, Nouns would support this through some small grant rounds; like prophouse... but not sure the group can/will get behind what seems to be the majority of funding for the project.. research, dev, even marketing... Hoping nouns can be a "layer on top" of ideas like this in the future, where we get brought along for the ride without funding 100% of the needs.
In regards to your question "Could you help me better understand your view of Nouns core mission and values?" — I think its different for us all... but IMO we need to find a better tie-in to Nouns. For example: We helped fund wildlife conservation: They named a frog after nouns. When we funded a 3D clothing line, it incorporated traits and elements from the nouns collection.. Both fun examples of how nouns was represented in a sort of 'science' space. Not 100% sure what would make the great tie-in here that would get nouners excited to go along for the ride here... Maybe a collab with the Noggle Ring team: https://www.nouns.camp/candidates/the-noggle-ring--noggle--co--mintaway-a211237e165d08eee24d4b81e79a6611d6bbc65f
Against - Wins
FOR - 9 VOTES
AGAINST - 22 VOTES
"This is pretty interesting stuff but I am not sure how this does anything for nouns or what the rest of the community is building"
"Although this is interesting research, I don't think this is the right approach for Nouns as a brand."
ABSTAINS - 4 VOTES
I'll refrain from commenting on the nounishness of this, however I can say with high confidence -
DeSci is a strong emerging narrative that will likely carry the crypto space this cycle
This type of research is currently highly overlooked but shouldn't be - it has a high potential to generate real value and for further products and services be built on top of this
Maia is a highly credible researcher whom I know personally and has distinguished herself by her competence and original approach to controversial topics
I would love to see something like this flourish
Fyi, I'm one of the founders of BiohackerDAO.org, very active in the DeSci space (for disclosure this research does not benefit me or us personally in any way and it's not the reason I'm advocating for it).
would like to see Nouns push into DeSci
US Federal budgets for research have been on a steady decline for ~30 years, most every major national lab is operating at or near a 25 year budget low
if part of this experiment is creating a new form of society, advancing scientific research would play a critical role. there is a market gap that Nouns is positioned to uniquely fill
unfortunately, imo, on the spectrum of research that could be funded this falls far closer to decadent than "helping humanity thrive 🌱"
Agree with this vwr, unsure about reach here for the cost... I think in the past, Nouns would support this through some small grant rounds; like prophouse... but not sure the group can/will get behind what seems to be the majority of funding for the project.. research, dev, even marketing... Hoping nouns can be a "layer on top" of ideas like this in the future, where we get brought along for the ride without funding 100% of the needs.
In regards to your question "Could you help me better understand your view of Nouns core mission and values?" — I think its different for us all... but IMO we need to find a better tie-in to Nouns. For example: We helped fund wildlife conservation: They named a frog after nouns. When we funded a 3D clothing line, it incorporated traits and elements from the nouns collection.. Both fun examples of how nouns was represented in a sort of 'science' space. Not 100% sure what would make the great tie-in here that would get nouners excited to go along for the ride here... Maybe a collab with the Noggle Ring team: https://www.nouns.camp/candidates/the-noggle-ring--noggle--co--mintaway-a211237e165d08eee24d4b81e79a6611d6bbc65f
I would love to see Nouns get involved in the DeSci sector, but I think we could have more of an impact if we fund things that are open source and can scale.
imo DeScie projects at minimum need to be an Open Source with the respective licenses - not just documentation. I understand that this the stage of the research seams to be still very grassroots, but there could be more opportunity to partner with relevant media outlets, other platforms that educate in these fields as well as established thought leaders.
I remain skeptical about the value creation potential in DeSci, especially for projects that require significant upfront investment with uncertain outcomes.
The proposed research, while novel, does not clearly align with Nouns' core mission and values. I'm unconvinced that this initiative would meaningfully enhance Nouns' reputation or positive influence in the web3 ecosystem.
Agree with this vwr, unsure about reach here for the cost... I think in the past, Nouns would support this through some small grant rounds; like prophouse... but not sure the group can/will get behind what seems to be the majority of funding for the project.. research, dev, even marketing... Hoping nouns can be a "layer on top" of ideas like this in the future, where we get brought along for the ride without funding 100% of the needs.
In regards to your question "Could you help me better understand your view of Nouns core mission and values?" — I think its different for us all... but IMO we need to find a better tie-in to Nouns. For example: We helped fund wildlife conservation: They named a frog after nouns. When we funded a 3D clothing line, it incorporated traits and elements from the nouns collection.. Both fun examples of how nouns was represented in a sort of 'science' space. Not 100% sure what would make the great tie-in here that would get nouners excited to go along for the ride here... Maybe a collab with the Noggle Ring team: https://www.nouns.camp/candidates/the-noggle-ring--noggle--co--mintaway-a211237e165d08eee24d4b81e79a6611d6bbc65f
I remain skeptical about the value creation potential in DeSci, especially for projects that require significant upfront investment with uncertain outcomes.
The proposed research, while novel, does not clearly align with Nouns' core mission and values. I'm unconvinced that this initiative would meaningfully enhance Nouns' reputation or positive influence in the web3 ecosystem.
I remain skeptical about the value creation potential in DeSci, especially for projects that require significant upfront investment with uncertain outcomes.
The proposed research, while novel, does not clearly align with Nouns' core mission and values. I'm unconvinced that this initiative would meaningfully enhance Nouns' reputation or positive influence in the web3 ecosystem.
I would love to see Nouns get involved in the DeSci sector, but I think we could have more of an impact if we fund things that are open source and can scale.
Thank you so much for considering this proposal and for seeing the value in DeSci!
I've been carefully considering your point about open source. I see how making the algorithm public can enable broader impact by bringing in more collaborators. Therefore, I would like to add a commitment to share open documentation of the algorithm that is developed.
I believe the project is inherently scalable both because wearable devices are commercially available and not limited to a single platform, and because the successful existence of the device itself would enable a new wave of diverse sex research.
The proposal lacks a clear financial return mechanism and measurable impact metrics. While it presents an innovative idea, the financial request of $95,000 does not include specific KPIs or a return mechanism that aligns with Nouns DAO's financial interests. The proposal's potential impact on Nouns DAO's brand value is speculative and not substantiated with concrete metrics. Additionally, the execution feasibility is questionable given the challenges faced in the initial attempt and the lack of a detailed risk mitigation strategy.
We'd love to see further research on this surprisingly mysterious aspect of life and are big fans of supporting both DeSci and unconventional independent researchers, such as Maya.
The name is not our favourite, but to not judge a book by its cover, this seems to be a very promising proposal with the potential to engage/onboard many "newcomers" into the Nouns ecosystem due to the universal nature of the topic.|
I would love to see Nouns get involved in the DeSci sector, but I think we could have more of an impact if we fund things that are open source and can scale.
*Down to fund
Develop an algorithm for a wrist-wearable tracking device that can measure sexual pleasure and orgasm.
Video version of this proposal
95,000 USD
Set up fee for device platform .…. 5,000
One year access to the platform ….. 6,000
20 tracking devices @ 300/device .…. 6,000
One year research coordination (12hrs/week @ 50/hour) …. 31,000
Initial algorithm development (dev & compute resources) ….. 40,000
Recruitment and marketing …. 7,000
Total: 95,000
Sex is one of the most powerful human driving forces, shaping not only our social interactions and efforts towards our appearance, but sometimes our professional aspirations, personal goals, preferences, and identities (whether we are conscious of this or not). People are willing to go to incredible lengths to experience the deep, irreplaceable intimacy of connection with another person. And yet, once we get there, we often do not sufficiently understand what factors actually lead to a positive sexual experience.
The current field of sexual research is sadly lacking in vitality. For example, the Wikipedia entry on sex research in the 21st century is only four sentences long.
In the 1950s, Masters and Johnson were the first researchers to conduct sex research on subjects in the lab, resulting in the well-known “human sexual response cycle” theory. Today, there are some academic institutions (e.g. Kinsey Institute, Sage Lab) and a few independent researchers (e.g. Aella, Simone & Malcolm Collins) studying sexuality. However, experimental trials are rare due to the difficulty of recruiting participants, getting ethical approvals, and obtaining funding for potentially controversial research.
Even when we manage to conduct such studies, a lab environment almost certainly affects the subject’s sexual response. Imagine getting in the mood while hooked up to a vaginal or penile plethysmograph measuring the blood flow to your genitals. There is an opportunity to improve the generalizability of sex research by conducting it in a more realistic environment.
What is missing from sex research today is objectively measured (not self-reported) data that is collected in a naturalistic (non-clinical) setting. We believe that new technology in wearable tracking devices can enable this.
We had the opportunity to borrow a set of wrist-worn tracking devices for a period of several weeks. They are designed for research purposes, so unlike many popular tracking devices on the market, it was possible to access the raw sensor data that was recorded.
We distributed a few of these devices at a (“pop-up city”) conference. We asked people to record their data while engaging in sexual activity (either partnered or solo), and then press a button immediately after orgasm in order to label the event in the data.
In total, we recorded data from 5 different people across 15 sessions of sexual activity and 22 labeled orgasms.
Here is an example of a female participant’s recording of a 30 minute session of sexual activity during which she labeled three orgasms (the red dotted lines). The data are scaled so that they can be displayed on the same chart. It includes PPG sensors, SPO2, acceleration, and heart rate.
Notably, the third orgasm is the only one with a pronounced heart rate spike, although she subjectively felt that she came in each instance. This brings up an issue that will need to be considered – Can we trust the labeling of the data when it's hard for people to tell if they had a "real" orgasm? And how do we define a “real” orgasm? Is it subjective, physiologically objective, or both?
Unfortunately, this example was one of the cleanest data recordings that we got. Due to several issues, including timestamp inaccuracy, inconsistent columns, and erroneous button presses, most of the data was too messy to include in statistical modeling.
Although it did not result in much usable data, this pilot trial was very informative about how we can do better next time. We need a more reliable tool that can record raw biometric data with high frequency and accuracy. We also require an easy and accurate mechanism for labeling orgasms. (This is in no way a criticism of our partners, since the circumstances were such that they were unable to prepare the devices as they normally would. We thank them for graciously offering us free use of their devices.)
We need to go back to data collection, making sure we can collect biometric data with consistent columns across reporters, try to debug the timestamp issues, and see if we can use a better mechanism to record button presses. We would also ask for some baseline data from the participants, doing normal things that are not sex, to provide a comparison.
We should also refine our analysis by exploring heart rate patterns in greater detail. Specifically, we can estimate the curvature of the heart rate, developing a synthetic indicator that reflects the quick rise and fall. This is a commonly used technique in financial modeling. Early observations suggest that high heart rate combined with a significant negative heart rate curvature may correlate with orgasm, but we need to confirm this with more data.
Additionally, it would be beneficial to upgrade our hardware to capture individual heartbeats continuously, rather than relying on step function data, to enhance the accuracy and granularity of our findings. We have already discussed with another hardware provider that we believe will fit the bill for the requirements of this initiative.
Set up fee for device platform .…. 5,000
One year access to the platform ….. 6,000
20 tracking devices @ 300/device .…. 6,000
One year research coordination (12hrs/week @ 50/hour) …. 31,000
Initial algorithm development (dev & compute resources) ….. 40,000
Recruitment and marketing …. 7,000
Total: 95,000
I (Maia) am the founder of Cosimo Research, a scientific research service that investigates unconventional topics that are not addressed by traditional institutions. Cosimo is deeply integrated with the DeSci community through partnerships with ResearchHub, Biohacker DAO, and DeScier, and I participate in many DeSci events such as Vitalia, Edge Lanna, Edge Esmeralda, and DeSci London.
We have already conducted two novel scientific studies in the field of sex and human attraction – one on vabbing (using one’s vaginal fluid as perfume to attract men) and one on potential sources of male pheromones.
I am highly passionate about the development of this new technology which would allow us to expand our groundbreaking sex research in exciting new directions. I truly believe that it could revolutionize humanity’s scientific understanding of sexual pleasure. I love talking about this project, so please reach out with any questions. <3