Application of a new method for simultaneous phase and baseline correction of NMR signals (SINC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, we presented a new approach for simultaneous phase and baseline correction of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) signals (SINC) that is based on multiobjective optimization. The algorithm can automatically correct large sets of NMR spectra, which are commonly acquired when reactions and processes are monitored with NMR spectroscopy. The aim of the algorithm is to provide spectra that can be evaluated quantitatively, for example, to calculate the composition of a mixture or the extent of reaction. In this work, the SINC algorithm is tested in three different studies. In an in-house comparison study, spectra of different mixtures were corrected both with the SINC method and manually by different experienced users. The study shows that the results of the different users vary significantly and that their average uncertainty of the composition measurement is larger than the uncertainty obtained when the spectra are corrected with the SINC method. By means of a dilution study, we demonstrate that the SINC method is also applicable for the correction of spectra with low signal-to-noise ratio. Furthermore, a large set of NMR spectra that was acquired to follow a reaction was corrected with the SINC method. Even in this system, where the areas of the peaks and their chemical shifts changed during the course of reaction, the SINC method corrected the spectra robustly. The results show that this method is especially suited to correct large sets of NMR spectra and it is thus an important contribution for the automation of the evaluation of NMR spectra.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".