Paper detail

Blind Source Separation for NMR Spectra with Negative Intensity

NMR spectral datasets, especially in systems with limited samples, can be difficult to interpret if they contain multiple chemical components (phases, polymorphs, molecules, crystals, glasses, etc...) and the possibility of overlapping resonances. In this paper, we benchmark several blind source separation techniques for analysis of NMR spectral datasets containing negative intensity. For benchmarking purposes, we generated a large synthetic datasbase of quadrupolar solid-state NMR-like spectra that model spin-lattice T1 relaxation or nutation tip/flip angle experiments. Our benchmarking approach focused exclusively on the ability of blind source separation techniques to reproduce the spectra of the underlying pure components. In general, we find that FastICA (Fast Independent Component Analysis), SIMPLISMA (SIMPLe-to-use-Interactive Self-modeling Mixture Analysis), and NNMF (Non-Negative Matrix Factorization) are top-performing techniques. We demonstrate that dataset normalization approaches prior to blind source separation do not considerably improve outcomes. Within the range of noise levels studied, we did not find drastic changes to the ranking of techniques. The accuracy of FastICA and SIMPLISMA degrades quickly if excess (unreal) pure components are predicted. Our results indicate poor performance of SVD (Singular Value Decomposition) methods, and we propose alternative techniques for matrix initialization. The benchmarked techniques are also applied to real solid state NMR datasets. In general, the recommendations from the synthetic datasets agree with the recommendations and results from the real data analysis. The discussion provides some additional recommendations for spectroscopists applying blind source separation to NMR datasets, and for future benchmark studies.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.