A Validation Study on the Simultaneous Quantification of Multiple Wine Aroma Compounds with Static Headspace-Gas Chromatography-Ion Mobility Spectrometry (SHS-GC-IMS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new quantitative method based on static headspace−gas chromatography−ion mobility spectrometry (SHS−GC−IMS) is proposed, which enables the simultaneous quantification of multiple aroma compounds in wine. The method was first evaluated for its stability and the necessity of using internal standards as a quality control measure. The two major hurdles in applying GC-IMS in quantification studies, namely, non-linearity and multiple ion species, were also investigated using the Boltzmann function and generalized additive model (GAM) as potential solutions. Metrics characterizing the model performance, including root mean squared error, bias, limit of detection, limit of quantification, repeatability, reproducibility, and recovery were investigated. Both non-linear fitting methods, Boltzmann function and GAM, were able to return desirable analytical outcomes with an acceptable range of error. Potential pitfalls that would cause inaccurate quantification i.e., effects of ethanol content and competitive ionization, were also discussed. The performance of the SHS-GC-IMS method was subsequently compared against a currently established method, namely, GC-MS, using actual wine samples. These findings provide an initial validation of a GC-IMS-based quantification method, as well as a starting point for further enhancing the analytical scope of GC-IMS.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".