Identification of traditional East Asian handmade papers through the multivariate data analysis of pyrolysis-GC/MS data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An analytical approach based on the multivariate analysis of on-line pyrolysis-gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) data is proposed for the identification of traditional East Asian handmade papers from different fiber material origins. This approach utilized several biomarkers detected during the Py-GC/MS analysis of paper samples. At first, the total ion chromatogram (TIC) was taken as the response and then the extracted ion chromatograms (EICs) were considered to improve the discrimination of papers. The influence of different data pretreatments (raw responses vs. normalized values) including different weightings of the variables (weighting as 1 vs. weighting as 1/STD, where STD stands for standard deviation) for principal component analysis was also investigated. The results showed that compared to the commonly used microscopy techniques, the Py-GC/MS technique proved to be able to discriminate against handmade paper materials that have similar microscopic morphologies such as Morus species vs. Broussonetia species. The data pretreatment influenced PCA modeling: the analysis based on normalized values showed more interpretable PCA group features for Moraceae species. PCA without weighting resulted unsurprisingly in discrimination through the presence of high intensity response biomarkers, while when applying weight as 1/STD, a PCA loading plot was shown to provide a group of compounds, most of them being present at low levels, to be discriminating. Additionally, the characteristic EICs can provide a data matrix for statistical analysis avoiding the interference from a co-eluting compound and background compared to the data matrix obtained from the TIC. As a result, a quick Py-GC/MS based handmade paper identification procedure using PCA modeling of the characteristic EICs was proposed for the first time in the identification of traditional East Asian handmade papers. This procedure could be very beneficial for cultural heritage applications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".