Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/67342
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChanida Krongchaien_US
dc.contributor.authorSakunna Wongsaipunen_US
dc.contributor.authorSujitra Funsueben_US
dc.contributor.authorParichat Theanjumpolen_US
dc.contributor.authorJaroon Jakmuneeen_US
dc.contributor.authorSila Kittiwachanaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-02T14:45:04Z-
dc.date.available2020-04-02T14:45:04Z-
dc.date.issued2020en_US
dc.identifier.citationChiang Mai Journal of Science 47, 1 (January 2020), 160-174en_US
dc.identifier.issn0125-2526en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://epg.science.cmu.ac.th/ejournal/dl.php?journal_id=10583en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/67342-
dc.description.abstractVariable selection aims to identify important parameters in relation to predicted responses. Selection outcomes of the important variables could be different depending on the methods used. In this research, the important variables identified using linear and non-linear variable selection methods based on partial least squares-variable important in prediction (PLS-VIP) and self organizing mapdiscrimination index (SOM-DI) were compared. Two datasets, near-infrared (NIR) spectra of adulterated Thai Jasmine rice and ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) spectra of food colorant mixtures were used for the demonstration. The advantages and disadvantages for the use of the different algorithms were compared and discussed. For the NIR data, the calibration model using supervised self organizing map (SSOM) offered better prediction results and the SOM-DI variable selection method identified the spectral changes in NIR overtone regions as significance. On the other hand, PLS calibration model resulted in higher predictive errors while the PLS-VIP variable selection captured variation from the visible region between 664 nm and 884 nm. Using the UV-Vis data, PLS appeared to put attention on only the highest absorbance region of the peak maximum absorbance. In contrast, SSOM model highlighted the variation around the isosbestic spectral regions between the mixture components. The drawback for the use of a mixture design to construct the calibration models, leading to wrong interpretation of the important variables, was also discussed.en_US
dc.language.isoEngen_US
dc.publisherScience Faculty of Chiang Mai Universityen_US
dc.subjectvariable selectionen_US
dc.subjectmultivariate calibrationen_US
dc.subjectpartial least squares (PLS)en_US
dc.subjectelf organizing map (SOM)en_US
dc.subjectspectral data analysisen_US
dc.titleComparison Between Linear and Non-linear Variable Selection Methods with Applications to Spectroscopic (UV-Vis/NIR) Dataen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.