ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Machine Learning-Based Identification of Plastic Types Using Handheld Spectrometers.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward Material-Specific Peptides From in Silico Guided Peptide Engineering to Target PET in the Presence of PS.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Circular Strategies for Plastic Recycling and Upcycling.Polymers · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plastic waste and pollution is growing rapidly worldwide and most plastics end up in landfill or are incinerated because high-quality recycling is not possible. Plastic-type identification with a low-cost, handheld spectral approach could help in parts of the world where high-end spectral imaging systems on conveyor belts cannot be implemented. Here, we investigate how two fundamentally different handheld infrared spectral devices can identify plastic types by benchmarking the same analysis against a high-resolution bench-top spectral approach. We used the handheld Plastic Scanner, which measures a discrete infrared spectrum using LED illumination at different wavelengths, and the SpectraPod, which has an integrated photonics chip which has varying responsivity in different channels in the near-infrared. We employ machine learning using SVM, XGBoost, Random Forest and Gaussian Naïve Bayes models on a full dataset of plastic samples of PET, HDPE, PVC, LDPE, PP and PS, with samples of varying shape, color and opacity, as measured with three different experimental approaches. The high-resolution spectral approach can obtain an accuracy (mean ± standard deviation) of (0.97 ± 0.01), whereas we obtain (0.93 ± 0.01) for the SpectraPod and (0.70 ± 0.03) for the Plastic Scanner. Differences of reflectance at subsequent wavelengths prove to be the most important features in the plastic-type classification model when using high-resolution spectroscopy, which is not possible with the other two devices. Lower accuracy for the handheld devices is caused by their limitations, as the spectral range of both devices is limited-up to 1600 nm for the SpectraPod, while the Plastic Scanner has limited sensitivity to reflectance at wavelengths of 1100 and 1350 nm, where certain plastic types show characteristic absorbance bands. We suggest that combining selective sensitivity channels (as in the SpectraPod) and illuminating the sample with varying LEDs (as with the Plastic Scanner) could increase the accuracy in plastic-type identification with a handheld device.
Indexed as
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.