MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399364108 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpca.4c01592

Identification of Reaction Network Hypotheses for Complex Feedstocks from Spectroscopic Measurements with Minimal Human Intervention

2024· article· en· W4399364108 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Karthik Srinivasan, Anjana Puliyanda, Vinay Prasad

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta InnovatesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceFingerprint (computing)Biological systemSynthetic dataData miningGround truthIdentification (biology)Process (computing)Artificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we detail an automated reaction network hypothesis generation protocol for processes involving complex feedstocks where information about the species and reactions involved is unknown. Our methodology is process agnostic and can be utilized in any reactive process with spectroscopic measurements that provide information on the evolution of the components in the mixture. We decompose the mixture spectra to obtain spectroscopic signatures of the individual components and use a 1-D convolutional neural network to automatically identify functional groups indicated by them. We employ atom-atom mapping to automatically recover reaction rules that are applied on candidate molecules identified from chemistry databases through fingerprint similarity. The method is tested on synthetic data and on spectroscopic measurements of lab-scale batch hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) of biomass to determine the accuracy of prediction across datasets of varying complexities. Our methodology is able to identify reaction network hypotheses containing reaction networks close to the ground truth in the case of synthetic data, and we are also able to recover candidate molecules and reaction networks close to the ones reported in the previous literature studies for biomass pyrolysis.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207