MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W234923548

Quantitative analyses aspect of vibrational spectroscopy and its applications in agriculture

2010· article· en· W234923548 on OpenAlexaff
Wenbo Wang, Jitendra Paliwal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalibrationRaman spectroscopySpectroscopyPrincipal component analysisInfrared spectroscopyPartial least squares regressionInfraredComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBiological systemPattern recognition (psychology)Analytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryOpticsMachine learningMathematicsPhysicsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The three main branches of vibrational spectroscopy, i.e., mid-infrared, near-infrared, and Raman spectroscopy, are widely accepted techniques for qualitative analyses in the agriculture and food sectors. Mid-infrared and Raman spectroscopy probe the same ‘fingerprinting’ area for most organic as well inorganic matter. Such advantages make them ideal classification tools, with little need for sample preparation in routine analysis. Utilization of these vibrational spectroscopy techniques for quantitative analysis is more complicated and requires data handling to render meaningful interpretation of the spectra. A brief introduction to the theoretical background of infrared absorption and Raman inelastic scattering processes is presented. This article presents a detailed discussion of the fundamental principles behind quantitative analysis using absorption and emission spectroscopy techniques. Different measurement modes and their relationship to the acquisition and transformation of spectral data are explained with practical applications related to the quantitative theory. This paper also talks about the rationale for pre-treating the data. A review of the available procedures to pre-process different kinds of spectra and to build calibration concludes the paper. Linear calibration methods, e.g., classic linear regression, principal component regression, partial least squares regression, support vector machines, and nonlinear methods such as artificial neural network, are briefly reviewed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207