MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006003209 · doi:10.1021/acs.cgd.9b01482

Simultaneous Measurement of Solution Concentration and Slurry Density by Raman Spectroscopy with Artificial Neural Network

2020· article· en· W3006003209 on OpenAlexafffund
Mengxing Lin, Yuanyi Wu, Sohrab Rohani

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystal Growth & Design · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsPartial least squares regressionArtificial neural networkMean squared errorPrincipal component regressionPrincipal component analysisBiological systemRaman spectroscopyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Linear regressionChemistryMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsChromatographyComputer scienceOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, the capability of Raman spectroscopy to measure the solution concentration and slurry density simultaneously and quantitatively was studied. Paracetamol–ethanol and l -glutamic acid–water systems were chosen as model systems. Different preprocessing methods (spectra range selection, baseline removal, direct orthogonal signal correction (DOSC), or no processing) and multivariable analysis techniques (characteristic peaks regression (CPR), principal component regression (PCR), partial least-squares regression (PLSR), and artificial neural network (ANN)) were applied and compared based on the root mean squared error (RMSE). It was demonstrated that the solution and solids concentration can be extracted separately from Raman spectroscopy. On the one hand, it is found that DOSC preprocessing can improve the fitting performance of the linear regression models (CPR, PCR, and PLSR) but not for ANN model. On the other hand, the ANN method, owing to its nonlinear prediction ability, better predicted the results than the linear models when the signal was weak.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrystal Growth & DesignSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207