MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380200828 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17115

Detection of dextran, maltodextrin and soluble starch in the adulterated Lycium barbarum polysaccharides (LBPs) using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and machine learning models

2023· article· en· W4380200828 on OpenAlex
Lulu Chen, Siyue Yang, Zhuan Nan, Yanping Li, Jianlong Ma, Jianbao Ding, Yi Lv, Jin Yang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersKey Research and Development Program of NingxiaScience and Technology Department of Ningxia
KeywordsMaltodextrinFourier transform infrared spectroscopyStarchChemistryPartial least squares regressionArtificial intelligencePolysaccharidePrincipal component analysisAdulterantSupport vector machineMathematicsChromatographyFood scienceComputer scienceMachine learningSpray dryingBiochemistryChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the similar chemical structures and physicochemical properties, it is challenging to distinguish dextran, maltodextrin, and soluble starch from the polysaccharide products of plant origin, such as Lycium barbarum polysaccharides (LBPs). Using the first-order derivatives of Fourier-transformed infrared spectroscopy (FTIR, wave range 1800–400 cm −1 ), this study proposed a two-step pipeline to identify dextran, maltodextrin, and soluble starch from adulterated LBPs samples qualitatively and quantitatively. We applied principal component analysis (PCA) to reduce the dimensionality of FTIR features. For the qualitative step, a set of machine learning models, including logistic regression, support vector machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes, and partial least squares (PLS), were used to classify the adulterants. For the quantitative step, linear regression, LASSO, random forest, and PLS were used to predict the concentration of LBPs adulterants. The results showed that logistic regression and SVM are suitable for classifying adulterants, and random forests is superior for predicting adulterant concentrations. This would be the first attempt to discriminate the adulterants from the polysaccharide's product of plant origin. The proposed two-step methods can be easily extended to other applications for the quantitative and qualitative detection of samples from adulterants with similar chemical structures.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.238 · 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