ArticleBioresources and bioprocessing2026
Grey-box modeling framework for consolidated bioprocessing systems: an endpoint-guided approach.
Article in Bioresources and bioprocessing, 2026. 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Correction: Grey-box modeling framework for consolidated bioprocessing systems: an endpoint-guided approach.Bioresources and bioprocessing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Consolidated bioprocessing (CBP) combines enzyme production, biomass hydrolysis, and fermentation within a single process, but its modeling remains difficult because of biological nonlinearities, feedstock heterogeneity, and limited time-resolved measurements. This paper presents an endpoint-guided grey-box framework that connects data-driven endpoint prediction, phase-structured mechanistic reconstruction, and synthetic state-estimation analysis. A literature-derived CBP ethanol dataset containing 540 runs and 90 encoded input features was preprocessed using out-of-fold residual screening, after which several nonlinear regressors were compared using both log-transformed and raw endpoint targets. Repeated cross-validation selected a raw-target XGBoost model, XGB_raw, as the final endpoint surrogate, with RMSE [Formula: see text]. The independent hold-out subset favored histogram-based gradient boosting models, indicating that the leading boosting-based models were closely matched. For XGB_raw, hold-out performance improved after residual screening from RMSE [Formula: see text], MAE [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text] to RMSE [Formula: see text], MAE [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text]. Feature-attribution analysis identified hemicellulose content, substrate concentration, temperature, residence time, enzyme-assisted pretreatment, pH, cellulose content, and mixing rate as important endpoint predictors. The selected endpoint surrogate was then coupled to a three-phase hybrid simulator representing enzyme production, hydrolysis, and fermentation. Endpoint-guided calibration identified biologically plausible parameterizations that reproduced the target endpoint through moderate changes in growth, enzyme production, hydrolytic capacity, and product formation. Because independent time-resolved CBP trajectories were unavailable, the simulated profiles are interpreted as endpoint-constrained reconstructions rather than validated kinetic trajectories. A synthetic unscented Kalman filter study showed accurate reconstruction of sugar and scaled-product states, with lower-fidelity recovery of enzyme dynamics. Overall, the framework provides a feasibility-oriented basis for CBP endpoint prediction, mechanistic interpretation, and preliminary soft-sensing design under sparse-data conditions.
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.