Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40606754›Full record

ReviewiScience2025

A review on spectral data preprocessing techniques for machine learning and quantitative analysis.

Chunsheng Yan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Chunsheng YanZhejiang University Library, Hangzhou 310058, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spectroscopic techniques are indispensable for material characterization, yet their weak signals remain highly prone to interference from environmental noise, instrumental artifacts, sample impurities, scattering effects, and radiation-based distortions (e.g., fluorescence and cosmic rays). These perturbations not only significantly degrade measurement accuracy but also impair machine learning-based spectral analysis by introducing artifacts and biasing feature extraction. This review provides a systematic evaluation of critical spectral preprocessing methods-encompassing cosmic ray removal, baseline correction, scattering correction, normalization, filtering and smoothing, spectral derivatives, and advanced techniques like 3D correlation analysis-highlighting their theoretical underpinnings, performance trade-offs, and optimal application scenarios. The field is undergoing a transformative shift driven by three key innovations: context-aware adaptive processing, physics-constrained data fusion, and intelligent spectral enhancement. These cutting-edge approaches enable unprecedented detection sensitivity achieving sub-ppm levels while maintaining >99% classification accuracy, with transformative applications spanning pharmaceutical quality control, environmental monitoring, and remote sensing diagnostics.

Indexed as

Computer scienceEngineeringPhysics

Identifiers

PMID40606754
PMCPMC12221524

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.