深还是浅?基于激励-发射矩阵和多机器学习算法的油种识别比较分析。

IF 2.6 4区 化学 Q2 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Journal of Fluorescence Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-14 DOI:10.1007/s10895-023-03511-w
Ming Xie, Qintuan Xu, Ying Li
{"title":"深还是浅?基于激励-发射矩阵和多机器学习算法的油种识别比较分析。","authors":"Ming Xie, Qintuan Xu, Ying Li","doi":"10.1007/s10895-023-03511-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the continuous expansion of petroleum extraction, transportation, and storage, the risk of oil spills at sea has also increased, posing a serious threat to marine safety. The excitation-emission matrix (EEM), which is composed of the fluorometric spectra under multiple excitation wavelengths, becomes a feasible approach to identify oil species. Despite the fact that various machine learning models have been applied to analyse EEMs of oil pollutants, it is unclear how much improvements the deep learning models have achieved, especially comparing with the shallow learning models. This paper presents a comparative analysis on the oil species identification using four types of machine learning models: random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), back propagation neural network (BPNN), and deep convolutional neural network (DCNN). The fluorescence of some common oils was excited using a tuneable xenon lamp and collected with a high-resolution spectrometer to form the EEMs for model training and testing.The results show that SVM, BPNN, and DCNN achieved high identification accuracies that are more than 93% on all types of oils tested in the study. The two deep learning models didn't have significant improvement over the SVM model. Considering the fact that the deep learning models require much larger number of calculations and longer running time, the SVM tends to be more suitable for oil species identification when considering the balance between the model accuracy and efficiency. This study provides some guidance on the choices of oil species identification model in the cases of oil spills.</p>","PeriodicalId":15800,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fluorescence","volume":" ","pages":"2907-2915"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deep or Shallow? A Comparative Analysis on the Oil Species Identification Based on Excitation-Emission Matrix and Multiple Machine Learning Algorithms.\",\"authors\":\"Ming Xie, Qintuan Xu, Ying Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10895-023-03511-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>With the continuous expansion of petroleum extraction, transportation, and storage, the risk of oil spills at sea has also increased, posing a serious threat to marine safety. The excitation-emission matrix (EEM), which is composed of the fluorometric spectra under multiple excitation wavelengths, becomes a feasible approach to identify oil species. Despite the fact that various machine learning models have been applied to analyse EEMs of oil pollutants, it is unclear how much improvements the deep learning models have achieved, especially comparing with the shallow learning models. This paper presents a comparative analysis on the oil species identification using four types of machine learning models: random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), back propagation neural network (BPNN), and deep convolutional neural network (DCNN). The fluorescence of some common oils was excited using a tuneable xenon lamp and collected with a high-resolution spectrometer to form the EEMs for model training and testing.The results show that SVM, BPNN, and DCNN achieved high identification accuracies that are more than 93% on all types of oils tested in the study. The two deep learning models didn't have significant improvement over the SVM model. Considering the fact that the deep learning models require much larger number of calculations and longer running time, the SVM tends to be more suitable for oil species identification when considering the balance between the model accuracy and efficiency. This study provides some guidance on the choices of oil species identification model in the cases of oil spills.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Fluorescence\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2907-2915\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Fluorescence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10895-023-03511-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Fluorescence","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10895-023-03511-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着石油开采、运输和储存规模的不断扩大,海上溢油的风险也在不断增加,对海洋安全构成了严重威胁。由多种激发波长下的荧光光谱组成的激发-发射矩阵(EEM)成为一种可行的油种识别方法。尽管各种机器学习模型已被应用于分析石油污染物的eem,但尚不清楚深度学习模型取得了多大的改进,特别是与浅学习模型相比。本文采用随机森林(RF)、支持向量机(SVM)、反向传播神经网络(BPNN)和深度卷积神经网络(DCNN)四种机器学习模型对石油物种识别进行了对比分析。使用可调谐氙灯激发一些常见油的荧光,并用高分辨率光谱仪收集,形成eem用于模型训练和测试。结果表明,SVM、BPNN和DCNN在本研究测试的所有油类中均取得了较高的识别准确率,准确率均在93%以上。与SVM模型相比,这两种深度学习模型没有显著的改进。考虑到深度学习模型需要更大的计算量和更长的运行时间,在考虑模型精度和效率之间的平衡时,SVM更适合于油种识别。该研究对溢油事故中油种识别模型的选择具有一定的指导意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Deep or Shallow? A Comparative Analysis on the Oil Species Identification Based on Excitation-Emission Matrix and Multiple Machine Learning Algorithms.

Deep or Shallow? A Comparative Analysis on the Oil Species Identification Based on Excitation-Emission Matrix and Multiple Machine Learning Algorithms.

With the continuous expansion of petroleum extraction, transportation, and storage, the risk of oil spills at sea has also increased, posing a serious threat to marine safety. The excitation-emission matrix (EEM), which is composed of the fluorometric spectra under multiple excitation wavelengths, becomes a feasible approach to identify oil species. Despite the fact that various machine learning models have been applied to analyse EEMs of oil pollutants, it is unclear how much improvements the deep learning models have achieved, especially comparing with the shallow learning models. This paper presents a comparative analysis on the oil species identification using four types of machine learning models: random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), back propagation neural network (BPNN), and deep convolutional neural network (DCNN). The fluorescence of some common oils was excited using a tuneable xenon lamp and collected with a high-resolution spectrometer to form the EEMs for model training and testing.The results show that SVM, BPNN, and DCNN achieved high identification accuracies that are more than 93% on all types of oils tested in the study. The two deep learning models didn't have significant improvement over the SVM model. Considering the fact that the deep learning models require much larger number of calculations and longer running time, the SVM tends to be more suitable for oil species identification when considering the balance between the model accuracy and efficiency. This study provides some guidance on the choices of oil species identification model in the cases of oil spills.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Fluorescence
Journal of Fluorescence 化学-分析化学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
5.4 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Fluorescence is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original articles that advance the practice of this established spectroscopic technique. Topics covered include advances in theory/and or data analysis, studies of the photophysics of aromatic molecules, solvent, and environmental effects, development of stationary or time-resolved measurements, advances in fluorescence microscopy, imaging, photobleaching/recovery measurements, and/or phosphorescence for studies of cell biology, chemical biology and the advanced uses of fluorescence in flow cytometry/analysis, immunology, high throughput screening/drug discovery, DNA sequencing/arrays, genomics and proteomics. Typical applications might include studies of macromolecular dynamics and conformation, intracellular chemistry, and gene expression. The journal also publishes papers that describe the synthesis and characterization of new fluorophores, particularly those displaying unique sensitivities and/or optical properties. In addition to original articles, the Journal also publishes reviews, rapid communications, short communications, letters to the editor, topical news articles, and technical and design notes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信