Principal Component Analysis Approach for Modeling Sulfur K‐XANES Spectra of Humic Acids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative application of x‐ray absorption near edge structure (XANES) spectroscopy to soils and other geochemical systems requires a determination of the proportions of multiple chemical species that contribute to the measured spectrum. Two common approaches to fitting XANES spectra are spectral deconvolution and least‐squares linear combination fitting (LCF). The objective of this research was to evaluate principal component analysis (PCA) coupled with target transformation to model S K‐XANES spectra of humic acid samples, and to compare the results with least‐squares LCF. Principal component analysis provided a statistical basis for choosing the number of standard species to include in the fitting model. Target transformation identified which standards were statistically more likely to explain the spectra of the humic acid samples. The selected standards and the scaling coefficients obtained by the PCA approach deviated by ≤6 mol% from results obtained by performing LCF using a large number of binary, ternary, and quaternary combinations of seven S standards. Because no energy shift is allowed in the PCA approach, fitting may be refined, when appropriate, by using afterwards a least‐squares method that includes energy offset parameters. Statistical ranking of the most likely standard spectra contributing to the unknown spectra enhanced LCF by reducing the analysis to a smaller set of standard spectra. The PCA approach is a valuable complement to other spectral fitting techniques as it provides statistical criteria that improve insight to the data, and lead to a more objective approach to fitting.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".