Sample‐wise spectral multivariate calibration desensitized to new artifacts relative to the calibration data using a residual penalty

Calibration maintenance is an important aspect of multivariate calibration. With spectral measurements, the goal of calibration maintenance involves sustaining the predictability of a primary calibration model in new secondary conditions. Among the many methodologies, penalty‐based Tikhonov regularization variants have been successful by sample augmenting primary calibration data with a matrix of just a few secondary samples as well as operating with an additional sparse penalty to include wavelength selection. Studied in this paper is a new sample‐wise (local) Tikhonov regularization–based penalty calibration approach. Penalized is a diagonal matrix with the residual vector (relative to the primary calibration space) of the new secondary sample. Thus, the same full calibration set is used for each new sample. Changing for each secondary sample is the corresponding sample‐wise residual vector on the penalized diagonal matrix. The intent of the presented approach is to form sample‐wise regression vectors desensitized to characteristics of the new sample not present in the primary calibration set. The more distinct the secondary conditions are relative to the primary conditions, the more unsuccessful this local model updating becomes. Proposed is a sample‐wise outlier mechanism to discern when the residual penalty can or cannot be used to form a useful updated model. The residual penalty modeling and outlier detection processes require tuning parameter optimizations. A fusion approach is used to automatically select tuning parameter values. Simulated and near‐infrared data are evaluated, demonstrating the applicability of the method.

[1]  John H. Kalivas,et al.  Fusion strategies for selecting multiple tuning parameters for multivariate calibration and other penalty based processes: A model updating application for pharmaceutical analysis. , 2016, Analytica chimica acta.

[2]  J. Kalivas,et al.  Penalty processes for combining roughness and smoothness in spectral multivariate calibration , 2016 .

[3]  J. Kalivas,et al.  Sum of ranking differences (SRD) to ensemble multivariate calibration model merits for tuning parameter selection and comparing calibration methods. , 2015, Analytica chimica acta.

[4]  P. Dardenne,et al.  Prediction of Chemical Characteristics of Fibrous Plant Biomasses from Their near Infrared Spectrum: Comparing Local versus Partial Least Square Models and Cross-Validation versus Independent Validations , 2015 .

[5]  Xueguang Shao,et al.  Standardization of near infrared spectra measured on multi-instrument. , 2014, Analytica chimica acta.

[6]  J. Kalivas,et al.  Characterizing multivariate calibration tradeoffs (bias, variance, selectivity, and sensitivity) to select model tuning parameters , 2014 .

[7]  Erik Andries,et al.  Sparse Methods in Spectroscopy: An Introduction, Overview, and Perspective , 2013, Applied spectroscopy.

[8]  E. Andries Sparse models by iteratively reweighted feature scaling: a framework for wavelength and sample selection , 2013 .

[9]  John H. Kalivas,et al.  Overview of two‐norm (L2) and one‐norm (L1) Tikhonov regularization variants for full wavelength or sparse spectral multivariate calibration models or maintenance , 2012 .

[10]  K. Héberger,et al.  Sum of ranking differences for method discrimination and its validation: comparison of ranks with random numbers , 2011 .

[11]  Erik Andries,et al.  Spectral Multivariate Calibration with Wavelength Selection Using Variants of Tikhonov Regularization , 2010, Applied spectroscopy.

[12]  J. Kalivas,et al.  Model updating for spectral calibration maintenance and transfer using 1-norm variants of Tikhonov regularization. , 2010, Analytical chemistry.

[13]  Steven D. Brown,et al.  Data fusion in multivariate calibration transfer. , 2010, Analytica chimica acta.

[14]  Jeroen Lammertyn,et al.  Increasing robustness against changes in the interferent structure by incorporating prior information in the augmented classical least-squares framework. , 2008, Analytical chemistry.

[15]  D. Haaland,et al.  Effects of Nonlinearities and Uncorrelated or Correlated Errors in Realistic Simulated Data on the Prediction Abilities of Augmented Classical Least Squares and Partial Least Squares , 2004, Applied spectroscopy.

[16]  Frank Vogt,et al.  Fault‐tolerant spectroscopic data evaluation based on extended principal component regression correcting for spectral drifts and uncalibrated spectral features , 2003 .

[17]  Frank Vogt,et al.  Introduction and application of secured principal component regression for analysis of uncalibrated spectral features in optical spectroscopy and chemical sensing. , 2003, Analytical chemistry.

[18]  R. Anderssen,et al.  The Application of Localisation to near Infrared Calibration and Prediction through Partial Least Squares Regression , 2003 .

[19]  David M. Haaland,et al.  New augmented classical least squares methods for improved quantitative spectral analyses , 2002 .

[20]  A K Smilde,et al.  Influence of temperature on vibrational spectra and consequences for the predictive ability of multivariate models. , 1998, Analytical chemistry.

[21]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Locally Weighted Learning , 1997, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[22]  K. Héberger Sum of ranking differences compares methods or models fairly , 2010 .

[23]  S. D. Brown,et al.  Transfer of Multivariate Calibration Models , 2009 .

[24]  P. Hansen Rank-Deficient and Discrete Ill-Posed Problems: Numerical Aspects of Linear Inversion , 1987 .