Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 2026

Chromatographic Fingerprinting by Template Matching for Data Collected by Comprehensive Two-Dimensional Gas Chromatography
Published on: September 2, 2020
Investigation into the ability of Gaussian processes to faithfully reconstruct Chromatographic Response Function
Marwan Elkhettabi1, Leon Ewoud Niezen2, Pieter Libin3
1Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Department of Chemical Engineering, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium; KU Leuven, Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Pharmaceutical Analysis, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract:
To give guidance to future research on computer-aided method development, the present study aimed at quantifying the accuracy with which Gaussian processes can represent typical Chromatographic Response Function (CRF) surfaces underlying chromatographic method development. Gaussian processes make up the core of Bayesian optimization, an optimization method that currently shows great promise to solve chromatographic method development problems. CRF surfaces are known to be very complex and jagged, with many local minima and maxima. On the other hand, the Matérn-based kernels commonly used in Gaussian processes typically impose strong smoothness assumptions that conflict with sharp variations and many closely spaced local extrema. To obtain an unbiased assessment of the reconstruction accuracy, grid- and Bayesian optimization-based Gaussian process fittings were investigated. Both showed poor reconstruction of the complete CRF surface, even for relatively simple 10-component samples. This suggests a limited ability of the Gaussian process-based surrogate models making use of Matérn-based kernels to accurately capture the fine details of the CRF surfaces and delineate robustness regions. Grid-based approaches generally outperformed Bayesian optimization-based methods in terms of global reconstruction accuracy, while Bayesian optimization-based approaches were more successful at locating acceptable optima. However, both required substantially more experimental data points than conventional model-based strategies. Furthermore, for the most challenging scenario, in which "only" 25 evaluations were performed for a 20-component sample, the median difference with the true optimal method time ranged from 27% (10-component sample) to 102% (20-component sample), provided a correct solution was found.
More Related Videos
05:31Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Paired with Total Vaporization Solid-Phase Microextraction as a Forensic Tool
Published on: May 25, 2021
07:57Quantitative Detection of Trace Explosive Vapors by Programmed Temperature Desorption Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detector
Published on: July 25, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Chromatographic Resolution
The effectiveness of separation can be evaluated by determining the level of separation between two neighboring peaks in a chromatogram, which represents the individual components of a sample.
In chromatography,...
Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (GC–MS)
A gas chromatograph consists of a long, narrow capillary column with a polysiloxane coating on the inner wall. The coating...
Gas Chromatography: Overview of Detectors
A non-destructive detector allows a sample to be analyzed without altering or consuming it, meaning the sample can be collected after detection for further analysis. Examples include thermal conductivity detectors and...
Chromatographic Methods: Terminology
Gas Chromatography: Introduction
In GC, a sample is vaporized and mixed with an inert carrier gas (the mobile phase), which transports it through a column.
Gauss's Law