MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Domain Adaptation in LIBS Streaming Using Transfer Learning and Self-Learning for Soil Classification

2023· article· en· W4394003544 on OpenAlexafffund
Yichao Huang, S. Mohalan, N. F. Beier, Abdul Bais, Amina Hussein, Miles Dyck, Frank A. Hegmann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDomain adaptationTransfer of learningAdaptation (eye)Computer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningHuman–computer interactionPsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) has become a promising technology for determining the chemical composition of soil samples. The application of machine learning (ML) has accelerated the development of LIBS in soil analysis. However, ML for LIBS is challenging because 1) building robust ML models requires large calibration datasets while LIBS experimental data is typically limited, further limiting data streaming, 2) matrix effects deteriorate LIBS performance, and LIBS data is sensitive to changes in the apparatus, causing emission lines distribution highly variable. These issues may cause concept drift in LIBS streaming and make the relation between the input and the target spectra variable over time, leading to an ML model constructed for one LIBS system becomes less applicable to a different LIBS system. We propose transfer learning to conquer the challenges of limited data. We then use domain adaptation with self-learning to self-adapt to the domain shift in LIBS streaming to alleviate the matrix effects and improve the model generalization. To test the efficiency of the proposed method, we conduct experiments on the same soil samples but with different experiment parameters, such as wavelength and laser energy. The collected spectra are fed into our model in chunks. The EMSLIBS dataset used in the 2019 EMSLIBS competition is utilized to construct the transfer-learning model, which serves as the foundation for the model developed using our experimental data. Following this, self-learning is undertaken for each chunk by repeatedly predicting the current chunk using the model trained by previous chunks and then taking the confident predictions as pseudo-labels for co-training the model. It is shown that the average accuracy is improved by 9% with transfer learning and up to 15% better with transfer learning and self-learning during data streaming compared to an ML model that does not implement transfer learning and support adaption.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207