MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404424392 · doi:10.47852/bonviewjdsis42024036

NMR Phase Error Correction with New Modeling Approaches

2024· article· en· W4404424392 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Data Science and Intelligent Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreSpinal Cord Injury BCMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhase (matter)Computer scienceError detection and correctionAlgorithmChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy is a highly sensitive analytical technique essential for precise molecular identification and quantification. However, accurate results depend on effective pre-processing to correct for various types of errors. Phase error correction, in particular, is crucial for ensuring the reliability of NMR data. Current methods often rely on a single linear model, which may not adequately address all types of phase errors. As a result, this limitation frequently requires manual intervention, making the process both time-consuming and prone to errors. To address these limitations, we propose three modelling approaches for NMR phase error correction: nonlinear shrinkage, multiple models, and a new optimization function called delta absolute net minimization (DANM). Our comparison of seven methods revealed that nonlinear shrinkage outperformed others in both simulated spectra and a diabetes study, followed by multiple models with DANM. Additionally, our spike-in experiments demonstrated that DANM performed quite well in both single and multiple models. Our nonlinear shrinkage approach is a simple yet effective solution. We provide an open-source R package, NMRphasing, available on CRAN (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/NMRphasing/) and on GitHub (https://github.com/ajiangsfu/NMRphasing). Received: 6 August 2024 | Revised: 11 October 2024 | Accepted: 31 October 2024 Conflicts of Interest Aixiang Jiang is an Editorial Board Member for Journal of Data Science and Intelligent Systems and was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to this work. Data Availability Statement Data available on request from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Author Contribution Statement Aixiang Jiang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration. Andrée E. Gravel: Resources, Data curation, Writing - review & editing. Ethan Tse: Writing - review & editing. Sanjoy Kumar Das: Resources, Data curation. James Hanley: Conceptualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Project administration. Robert Nadon: Conceptualization, Resources, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Project administration.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.260 · 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