Preserving Full Spectrum Information in Imaging Mass Spectrometry Data Reduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Motivation Imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) has become an important tool for molecular characterization of biological tissue. However, IMS experiments tend to yield large datasets, routinely recording over 200,000 ion intensity values per mass spectrum and more than 100,000 pixels, i . e ., spectra, per dataset. Traditionally, IMS data size challenges have been addressed by feature selection or extraction, such as by peak picking and peak integration. Selective data reduction techniques such as peak picking only retain certain parts of a mass spectrum, and often these describe only medium-to-high-abundance species. Since lower-intensity peaks and, for example, near-isobar species are sometimes missed, selective methods can potentially bias downstream analysis towards a subset of species in the data rather than considering all species measured. Results We present an alternative to selective data reduction of IMS data that achieves similar data size reduction while better conserving the ion intensity profiles across all recorded m/z -bins, thereby preserving full spectrum information. Our method utilizes a low-rank matrix completion model combined with a randomized sparse-format-aware algorithm to approximate IMS datasets. This representation offers reduced dimensionality and a data footprint comparable to peak picking, but also retains complete spectral profiles, enabling comprehensive analysis and compression. We demonstrate improved preservation of lower signal-to-noise-ratio signals and near-isobars, mitigation of selection bias, and reduced information loss compared to current state-of-the art data reduction methods in 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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".