CoastalQuant HCHO Research · Development & validation
Every capability needs evidence of its own.
Our development program moves from a research prototype to laboratory studies, independent evaluation, and field evidence. The goal is a measurement system supported by a method others can examine.
Current focus: Engineering preparation
We are defining the measurement requirements and preparing the experimental work. The roadmap below sets out the program’s planned milestones.
Research update ·
Ethanol interference: literature review completed.
The reviewed literature supports ethanol interference. It did not establish an observed formaldehyde error above 200% attributable specifically to ethanol.
The note explains the evidence and its limits to inform planned validation. It reports no new measurements of our developing system.
Read the findings and sourcesDevelopment update ·
Preparing for laboratory evaluation.
In August 2026, CoastalQuant received written proposals from three laboratories for reference analysis of indoor-air samples. These proposals are under review as part of planning the evaluation of our formaldehyde measurement system.
The program remains in the preparation stage. Laboratory engagement and the testing schedule have yet to be finalized.
Development roadmap.
Five milestones connect prototype development with evidence from buildings and a public evaluation method. Each step gives the next a stronger foundation.
Select a milestone to explore the planned result and its value.
Planned milestone · December 2026
Prototype & test readiness
Prepare the research prototype and test system for laboratory evaluation.
What we aim to deliver
Bring together the prototype, controlled test environment, and reference measurements. Review the setup and procedures before beginning confirmatory laboratory studies.
Why it matters
A qualified test setup makes comparisons meaningful and gives the next studies a reliable foundation.
Planned milestone · July 2027
Laboratory performance evaluation
Evaluate formaldehyde measurement across interfering gases and environmental conditions.
What we aim to deliver
Characterize measurement response, repeatability, stability, and the effects of other gases, temperature, and humidity. Bring the laboratory findings together with their uncertainty and operating limits.
Why it matters
Understanding both performance and limitations establishes where a measurement may be useful.
Planned milestone · November 2027
Independent performance review
Evaluate a locked model on data not used in development, with independent reproduction of the analysis.
What we aim to deliver
Lock the model and analysis procedure before evaluation. Apply them to held-out data, compare with baseline methods, and have an independent analyst reproduce the evaluation. Review the evidence for proceeding to a field pilot.
Why it matters
Independent examination helps establish how well the approach works beyond the data used to develop it.
Planned milestone · September 2028
Real-building field evaluation
Assess the measurement system in buildings through a pilot and conditional expansion.
Planned study window: November 2027–September 2028
What we aim to deliver
Start the field pilot after laboratory testing and the locked blind evaluation meet their acceptance criteria, with independent reproduction of the analysis and site permissions, safety, and data terms in place. Expand to additional settings when the pilot findings support it, comparing measurements with reference methods and documenting building conditions.
Why it matters
Field evidence connects laboratory findings to the practical questions raised by construction, renovation, and building use.
Planned milestone · February 2029
Public evaluation framework
Share the evaluation method, findings, and supporting research materials.
What we aim to deliver
Prepare the evaluation protocol, uncertainty framework, and non-confidential materials needed to reproduce reported findings. Release the package after technical approval and intellectual-property, contractual, privacy, and site-permission review.
Why it matters
A transparent method lets researchers and laboratories examine, compare, and build on the work.
Dates mark the target completion of each milestone. Target dates follow the adopted validation plan. Timing may evolve with research findings and readiness.
Separate data and independent analysis.
The planned review has two parts: evaluate a locked model on data not used to develop it, and have an independent analyst reproduce the evaluation. Keeping data separate does not by itself make the reviewing organization independent. Reviewer roles and arrangements will be defined as part of study planning.
Evaluation scope · In preparation
What the evaluation needs to establish.
These are planned areas of evaluation. Study protocols will set concentration ranges, test conditions, reference methods, and acceptance thresholds before confirmatory testing. This summary is not a released protocol or a statement of achieved performance.
A record others can examine.
The planned public framework will identify protocol and instrument versions, test conditions, performance metrics, analysis steps, and changes between versions. Supporting data and analysis materials will need enough detail to reproduce reported findings, within the release conditions set out in the roadmap.
See framework timing and release conditions- Agreement with reference measurements
- Evaluate measurement bias, error, and uncertainty against an appropriate reference method under stated conditions.
- Repeatability and detection limits
- Assess variation in repeated measurements and the lowest concentrations that can be distinguished from background under the test conditions.
- Response, recovery, and drift
- Examine response and recovery times, sensor memory, and changes in performance over repeated use.
- Interference, temperature, and humidity
- Challenge the system with interfering gases and changes in temperature and relative humidity. R02's target scope includes ethanol and water; the broader test matrix will be defined in the protocol.
- Usable-data completeness
- Report the proportion of scheduled measurements that yield usable results, alongside data gaps and reasons for withholding or qualifying a result.
- Performance in buildings
- Compare field measurements with reference results and laboratory findings, documenting building conditions and any change in operating limits.
How results will be described
Make the status of each claim visible.
Readers should be able to tell what we intend to achieve, what an analysis suggests, and what an experiment actually measured.
- Development target
- An intended performance level or capability used to guide research; it remains to be demonstrated.
- Calculated result
- An output of a stated model or analysis, interpreted within its assumptions.
- Measured result
- An experimental observation reported with methods, test conditions, uncertainty, and limitations.
A research result has a defined scope.
Laboratory measurement performance alone cannot establish source identification or long-term trend reliability. Likewise, a result from our separate quantum computing program does not validate the formaldehyde instrument. Each application needs relevant tests.