ArticleScientific reports2026
Machine-learning prediction of biomass chemical composition using derivative thermogravimetric data of different biomass feedstocks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The behaviour of biomass in bioenergy and biorefinery processes is determined by its contents of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin. The conventional wet chemical methods used to determine these fractions are reliable but time-consuming and laborious. This study attempts to determine whether these fractions can be adequately predicted from derivative thermogravimetric (DTG) data alone. A total of 75 biomass samples, including bamboo, agricultural residues, shells, and binary blends, were used. In addition, we calculated 13 simple, physically meaningful descriptors from each DTG curve (67 points from 27 to 687 °C), including peak height and temperature, areas under fixed-temperature windows, and area ratios. We trained seven algorithms, one for each component: Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, Extreme Gradient Boosting, Ridge, Partial Least Squares, Support Vector Regression, and k-Nearest Neighbours. All models were evaluated using nested leave-one-out cross-validation, with parameters optimised in the loop, and model stability was assessed with repeated fivefold cross-validation. The engineered descriptors improved every component. Cellulose was predicted with moderate accuracy (cross-validated R
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.