Deep‐learning based <i>in situ</i> image monitoring crystal polymorph and size distribution: Modeling and validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In situ monitoring and closed‐loop control of the solution crystallization process are the modern trends for pharmaceutical development, in which the critical process parameters (CPPs) as well as the product critical quality attributes (CQAs) can be regulated and guaranteed during the manufacturing process. In this study, an in situ image monitoring methodology based on a state‐of‐the‐art deep‐learning model was developed to track the CQAs such as polymorph ratio, two‐dimensional crystal size, and crystal shape in a solvent‐mediated polymorphic transformation (SMPT) process. Coupled with the multidimensional process information, a 2D population balance model (PBM) was developed and validated using the results of the in situ image‐based CQAs analysis. The 2D‐PBM was solved using a high‐resolution finite volume method (HR‐FVM) which could provide a high dimensional particle‐size distribution. Through the validation between the process image analysis and the 2D‐PBM, the accuracy of image analysis was discussed, and the potential and challenges of in situ image analysis were proposed. This work aims to integrate the crystal polymorphism and two‐dimensional crystal size distribution (2D‐CSD) information in the SMPT process using intelligent microscopic image analysis and then to validate the results of neural network processing by solving the numerical solution of the multidimensional PBM.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".