ArticleScientific reports2015
Less is more: Avoiding the LIBS dimensionality curse through judicious feature selection for explosive detection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feature learning augmented with sampling and heuristics (FLASH) improves model performance and biomarker identification.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025Article
- Identification of tumor tissue in thin pathological samples via femtosecond laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy and machine learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A new hybrid algorithm for three-stage gene selection based on whale optimization.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Heavy Metal Detection inFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- A novel hybrid algorithm based on Harris Hawks for tumor feature gene selection.PeerJ. Computer science · 2023Article
- Quantitative Analysis of Major Metals in Agricultural Biochar Using Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy with an Adaboost Artificial Neural Network Algorithm.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Importance evaluation of spectral lines in Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy for classification of pathogenic bacteria.Biomedical optics express · 2018Article
- Recent Developments in Spectroscopic Techniques for the Detection of Explosives.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Real-timeBiomedical optics express · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite its intrinsic advantages, translation of laser induced breakdown spectroscopy for material identification has been often impeded by the lack of robustness of developed classification models, often due to the presence of spurious correlations. While a number of classifiers exhibiting high discriminatory power have been reported, efforts in establishing the subset of relevant spectral features that enable a fundamental interpretation of the segmentation capability and avoid the 'curse of dimensionality' have been lacking. Using LIBS data acquired from a set of secondary explosives, we investigate judicious feature selection approaches and architect two different chemometrics classifiers -based on feature selection through prerequisite knowledge of the sample composition and genetic algorithm, respectively. While the full spectral input results in classification rate of ca.92%, selection of only carbon to hydrogen spectral window results in near identical performance. Importantly, the genetic algorithm-derived classifier shows a statistically significant improvement to ca. 94% accuracy for prospective classification, even though the number of features used is an order of magnitude smaller. Our findings demonstrate the impact of rigorous feature selection in LIBS and also hint at the feasibility of using a discrete filter based detector thereby enabling a cheaper and compact system more amenable to field operations.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.