Paper detail

Reframing preprocessing selection as model-internal calibration in near-infrared spectroscopy: A large-scale benchmark of operator-adaptive PLS and Ridge models

Preprocessing screening is often the most expensive part of a near-infrared spectroscopy calibration workflow. It works because smoothing, derivatives, detrending and related filters change the spectral directions seen by PLS or Ridge regression, but a full external search repeatedly refits nearly the same linear model. This paper studies the case where that search can be collapsed into one calibration step. For strict linear preprocessing operators, the transformed PLS cross-covariance satisfies (X A^T)^T Y = A X^T Y, and Ridge regression depends on the operator-induced kernel X A^T A X^T. These identities allow a finite operator bank to be screened inside the model while retaining original-wavelength coefficients. Sample-adaptive or fitted corrections such as SNV, MSC, EMSC and ASLS remain fold-local branches, not absorbed into the algebra. The study uses the AOM benchmark cohort: 61 regression rows and 17 classification rows in the manifest. On the main regression denominator (N=32), plain compact-bank AOM-PLS records median RMSEP ratios of 0.991 against PLS-default and 0.990 against PLS-HPO; the selected ASLS-AOM-compact-cv5 branch records 0.985 and 1.002 on the same two references. The plain AOMRidge-global-compact-none baseline records 0.974 against Ridge-default and 0.984 against Ridge-HPO, while the selected AOMRidge-Blender-headline-spxy3 records 0.918 and 0.966. The selected classifier, AOM-PLS-DA-global-simpls-covariance, improves balanced accuracy by 0.159 on N=13 datasets with 12/13 wins. The runtime gap is the practical result: PLS-HPO takes a median total time of 710.81 s per run, whereas the selected AOM-PLS branch takes 1.63 s. Linear operator-adaptive calibration therefore gives comparable prediction quality to exhaustive preprocessing screening, with orders-of-magnitude less fitting time for PLS.

preprint2026arXivOpen 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.