MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417260596 · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.5c04616

Calibrated Uncertainty Estimation for Soil Organic Carbon from Raman Spectra

2025· article· en· W4417260596 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey K. Wiens, Natalia Solomatova, Sadegh Shokatian

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsAXYS Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUncertainty quantificationCalibrationRaman spectroscopyHeteroscedasticityMeasurement uncertaintyUncertainty analysisMonte Carlo methodHyperspectral imagingCurse of dimensionality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning (ML) is a powerful tool for inferring chemometric properties from Raman spectra, expanding the information extractable from high-dimensional spectral data. A growing application is the estimation of soil organic carbon (SOC), where ML models relate overlapping Raman and fluorescence features to chemical composition. However, these models typically lack calibrated, prediction-level uncertainty estimates that limit their utility in decision-critical contexts. We present a framework for quantifying predictive uncertainty in SOC estimation from Raman spectra using Shifted Excitation Raman Difference Spectroscopy (SERDS). The approach employs conformal prediction (CP) to generate statistically valid prediction intervals using a held-out calibration data set and is compatible with a variety of uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods. To our knowledge, this is the first unified framework that integrates conformal calibration with multiple UQ strategies for Raman-based SOC estimation, addressing both aleatoric (irreducible) and epistemic (reducible) sources of uncertainty in a field-relevant setting. We assess the framework across several regression models, including Deep Ensembles, Bayesian neural networks, Monte Carlo Dropout, quantile regression, and heteroscedastic Gaussian models. All methods, when conformalized, produced well-calibrated uncertainty estimates with narrow prediction intervals, achieving reliable empirical coverage across confidence levels. Ablation studies revealed that many UQ techniques were poorly calibrated without conformalization. Our findings indicate that uncertainty in this task is predominantly aleatoric in nature, suggesting that improvements in predictive performance will depend more on improving spectral quality and preprocessing than on model complexity. This framework provides a practical, generalizable solution for generating trustworthy, calibrated, sample-specific uncertainty estimates in Raman-based chemometric analyses.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207