Targeted Profiling: Quantitative Analysis of <sup>1</sup>H NMR Metabolomics Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracting meaningful information from complex spectroscopic data of metabolite mixtures is an area of active research in the emerging field of "metabolomics", which combines metabolism, spectroscopy, and multivariate statistical analysis (pattern recognition) methods. Chemometric analysis and comparison of 1H NMR1 spectra is commonly hampered by intersample peak position and line width variation due to matrix effects (pH, ionic strength, etc.). Here a novel method for mixture analysis is presented, defined as "targeted profiling". Individual NMR resonances of interest are mathematically modeled from pure compound spectra. This database is then interrogated to identify and quantify metabolites in complex spectra of mixtures, such as biofluids. The technique is validated against a traditional "spectral binning" analysis on the basis of sensitivity to water suppression (presaturation, NOESY-presaturation, WET, and CPMG), relaxation effects, and NMR spectral acquisition times (3, 4, 5, and 6 s/scan) using PCA pattern recognition analysis. In addition, a quantitative validation is performed against various metabolites at physiological concentrations (9 microM-8 mM). "Targeted profiling" is highly stable in PCA-based pattern recognition, insensitive to water suppression, relaxation times (within the ranges examined), and scaling factors; hence, direct comparison of data acquired under varying conditions is made possible. In particular, analysis of metabolites at low concentration and overlapping regions are well suited to this analysis. We discuss how targeted profiling can be applied for mixture analysis and examine the effect of various acquisition parameters on the accuracy of quantification.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".