Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33921121›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Machine Learning-Based Classification of Lignocellulosic Biomass from Pyrolysis-Molecular Beam Mass Spectrometry Data.

Ambarish Nag, Alida Gerritsen, Crissa Doeppke, Anne E Harman-Ware

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ambarish NagComputational Science Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Pkwy, Golden, CO 80401, USA.
Alida GerritsenComputational Science Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Pkwy, Golden, CO 80401, USA.
Crissa DoeppkeRenewable Resources and Enabling Sciences Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Pkwy, Golden, CO 80401, USA.
Anne E Harman-WareRenewable Resources and Enabling Sciences Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West Pkwy, Golden, CO 80401, USA.

Funding

Center for Bioenergy Innovation NAOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy DE-AC36-08GO28308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-throughput analysis of biomass is necessary to ensure consistent and uniform feedstocks for agricultural and bioenergy applications and is needed to inform genomics and systems biology models. Pyrolysis followed by mass spectrometry such as molecular beam mass spectrometry (py-MBMS) analyses are becoming increasingly popular for the rapid analysis of biomass cell wall composition and typically require the use of different data analysis tools depending on the need and application. Here, the authors report the py-MBMS analysis of several types of lignocellulosic biomass to gain an understanding of spectral patterns and variation with associated biomass composition and use machine learning approaches to classify, differentiate, and predict biomass types on the basis of py-MBMS spectra. Py-MBMS spectra were also corrected for instrumental variance using generalized linear modeling (GLM) based on the use of select ions relative abundances as spike-in controls. Machine learning classification algorithms e.g., random forest, k-nearest neighbor, decision tree, Gaussian Naïve Bayes, gradient boosting, and multilayer perceptron classifiers were used. The k-nearest neighbors (k-NN) classifier generally performed the best for classifications using raw spectral data, and the decision tree classifier performed the worst. After normalization of spectra to account for instrumental variance, all the classifiers had comparable and generally acceptable performance for predicting the biomass types, although the k-NN and decision tree classifiers were not as accurate for prediction of specific sample types. Gaussian Naïve Bayes (GNB) and extreme gradient boosting (XGB) classifiers performed better than the k-NN and the decision tree classifiers for the prediction of biomass mixtures. The data analysis workflow reported here could be applied and extended for comparison of biomass samples of varying types, species, phenotypes, and/or genotypes or subjected to different treatments, environments, etc. to further elucidate the sources of spectral variance, patterns, and to infer compositional information based on spectral analysis, particularly for analysis of data without a priori knowledge of the feedstock composition or identity.

Indexed as

BiomassMachine LearningMass SpectrometryPyrolysisAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisLigninPrincipal Component AnalysisLigninlignocellulosebiomass analysisclassifiersdecision treeGaussian Naïve Bayesgradient boostingmolecular beam mass spectrometrymultilayer perceptronpyrolysisrandom forest

Identifiers

PMID33921121
PMCPMC8071563

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.