2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.115996
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of machine learning and deep learning methods for hydrated electron rate constant prediction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Using the LGBM model, feature importance of the input descriptors was performed using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) to examine the relative contribution of each descriptor to the predicted result (Figure S7). , This examination revealed two basic findings: First, the experimental descriptors (CNT type, CNT quantity, and ratio of dispersant to CNT) as a whole contributed more significantly to the model predictions. Second, molecular descriptors which captured the overall features of the molecular species (e.g., BCUT2D, Chi, SMR_VSA, and AvgIpc) contributed more than those which described more specific aspects of the molecule, such as the number of atoms (Supporting Information).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using the LGBM model, feature importance of the input descriptors was performed using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) to examine the relative contribution of each descriptor to the predicted result (Figure S7). , This examination revealed two basic findings: First, the experimental descriptors (CNT type, CNT quantity, and ratio of dispersant to CNT) as a whole contributed more significantly to the model predictions. Second, molecular descriptors which captured the overall features of the molecular species (e.g., BCUT2D, Chi, SMR_VSA, and AvgIpc) contributed more than those which described more specific aspects of the molecule, such as the number of atoms (Supporting Information).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The SHAP value of a feature is determined by the average of the feature’s contribution across all possible feature alignments in the feature set [ 38 ]. It measures the degree and direction of the descriptor’s contribution to the prediction result: higher absolute SHAP values indicate a higher contribution, and whether a SHAP value demonstrates positivity or negativity corresponds to the positive and negative impact of the descriptor on the prediction result [ 83 , 84 ]. The global importance of a feature is reflected by averaging the absolute SHAP values corresponding to all the samples in that feature [ 85 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We compared the results with those of traditional molecular similarity methods called fingerprinting. Here, we use Morgan or Circular Fingerprints which apply the Morgan algorithm to a set of atom invariants 56 , 57 . We will also verify these results using newly created natural product compound libraries that are not currently included in any database, such as the Compound Library of the Natural Products Research Laboratories (NPRL) of China Medical University Hospital (CMUH) in Taiwan 58 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%