# Peak Detection Method Evaluation for Ion Mobility Spectrometry by Using Machine Learning Approaches

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{4}

^{5}

^{6}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

**Figure 1.**Heat map of an MCC/IMS measurement. X-axis: inverse reduced mobility 1/K

_{0}in Vs/cm

^{2}; Y-axis: retention time r in seconds; signal: white (lowest) < blue < purple < red < yellow (highest), reaction ion peak (RIP) at 1/K

_{0}= 0.46 Vs/cm

^{2 }.

## 2. Preliminaries

#### 2.1. MCC/IMS Devices

^{63}Ni) is used for ionizing the molecules afterwards though different methods are available here. After the ion shutter opens, they are pulled towards a Faraday plate by an electric field created by drift rings. From the opposite direction drift gas is injected, which de-accelerates the ions. When the ions hit the Faraday plate they transfer their charge allowing us to measure a voltage signal over time. Depending on their mass and specific shape and other chemical properties, they collide more or less frequently with the drift gas, described by the collision cross section. Thus the drift time (time of flight inside the drift tube) varies for different compounds. The whole process takes about 50 ms.

**Figure 3.**Schematic view of an IMS device. After ionization the analytes (charged molecules) are accelerated by an electric field and move towards a Faraday plate to which they transfer their charge. This is measured as a voltage signal. A drift gas flows in the opposite direction, thereby causing collisions that separate the analytes by their chemical properties. See text for details.

#### 2.2. Data: Measurement and Peak Description

^{2}). The BioScout yields 12, 500 data points per single IMS spectrum at highest resolution, which equals to a sample rate of 250 kHz. Let T be the set of possible x-axis values (inverse reduced mobility or “drift times”) and R be the set of possible y-axis values (“retention times”).

_{r}

_{∈}

_{R,t}

_{∈}

_{T}, which can be visualized as a heat map (Figure 1). A single IMS spectrum corresponds to a row of the matrix, while a column of the matrix is called contour line. The whole matrix is called IMS chromatogram.

#### 2.3. Homogenizing and Filtering a Set of Measurements

- Drift gas flow: 100 ± 5 mL/min
- Sample gas flow: 100 ± 5 mL/min
- Carrier gas flow: 150 ± 5 mL/min
- MCC temperature: 40 ± 2 °C
- Drift gas: the same value for all measurements in the set
- Polarity: the same value for all measurements in the set

#### 2.4. Preprocessing an MCC/IMS Measurement

## 3. Methods

#### 3.1. Peak Detection Methods

#### 3.1.1. Manual Peak Detection in VisualNow

#### 3.1.2. Automated Local Maxima Search

#### 3.1.3. Automated Peak Detection in VisualNow

#### 3.1.4. Automated Peak Detection in IPHEx

#### 3.1.5. Peak Model Estimation

#### 3.1.6. Postprocessing

#### 3.2. Evaluation Methods

#### 3.2.1. Peak Position Comparison

#### 3.2.2. Machine Learning and Evaluation

**Linear Support vector machine:**SVM is one of the most widely used statistical learning methods. This technique is based on the maximization of the margin, defining the region surrounding the hyperplane that best splits the different classes. In 1992, Boser et al. suggested the application of the kernel trick as a solution to create non-linear classifiers, for example by using the Gaussian radial basis function; see [20] for more details. SVM was implemented using the e1071 package [21], with the cost and tolerance parameters of the linear SVM set to 100 and 0.01.

**Random Forest:**Random forest builds a large collection of de-correlated trees by using bootstrapping. It averages the results (regression) or uses a majority vote (classification). It is based on the bagging strategy, which is a sampling technique applying a method with low-bias and high-variance on subsets of the data. Decision trees are so-called perfect candidate methods. They can capture complex interactions in the data and are unbiased if grown sufficiently deep. To reduce the high-variance of the trees, the outcome is averaged. See Hastie et al. [16] for more details. The random forest classification and feature selection are performed using the randomForest R package, by Liaw and Wiener in 2002 [22]. Again, standard parameters were used.

**Evaluation:**In order to achieve a robust estimation of the quality, the data is evaluated in a ten-fold cross validation (CV) environment. In settings with comparably small data set sizes, the normal split into training-, validation-and test-set leads to relatively noisy estimates of the predictive performance. Therefore, we use CV to give an estimate for the actual accuracy of the predictive model. To ensure that each subset covers the variety of both classes, the classes are balanced within each CV subset. Furthermore the CV procedure was repeated 100 times using 100 different ten-fold cross validation sets. Thereby we can analyse the robustness of the different peak sets towards changes in the measurement set.

## 4. Results and Discussion

**Table 1.**The number of peaks detected by all methods. The second column gives the number of peak clusters after merging the peak lists (postprocessing).

# Peaks | # Peak Clusters | |
---|---|---|

Manual VisualNow | 1661 | 41 |

Local Maxima Search | 1477 | 69 |

Automatic VisualNow | 4292 | 88 |

Automatic IPHEX | 5697 | 420 |

Peak Model Estimation | 1358 | 69 |

**Table 2.**Overlap of the five peak detection methods. The overlap of the peak list A (row) and peak list B (column) is defined as the number of peaks in V that can be mapped to at least one peak in W. Note that the resulting mapping count table is not symmetric.

Manual | LMS | VisualNow | IPHEx | PME | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

Manual | 1661 | 911 | 1522 | 1184 | 791 |

Local Maxima | 868 | 1477 | 1096 | 1074 | 1128 |

VisualNow | 2667 | 2233 | 4292 | 2341 | 2082 |

IPHEx | 1112 | 1009 | 1157 | 5697 | 912 |

PME | 737 | 1086 | 983 | 926 | 1358 |

#### 4.1. Peak Position Comparision

#### 4.2. Evaluation by using Statistical Learning

**Table 3.**Classification Results of the linear support vector machine. The quality measures are the AUC, accuracy (ACC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).

AUC | ACC | Sensitivity | Speciﬁcity | PPV | NPV | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Manual VisualNow | 77.4 | 70.9 | 69.7 | 72.4 | 75.7 | 65.9 |

Local Maxima Search | 77 | 67.8 | 70.6 | 64.4 | 71 | 64 |

Automatic VisualNow | 76.6 | 68.3 | 66.8 | 70.1 | 73.4 | 63.1 |

Automatic IPHEx | 79.8 | 73 | 70.5 | 76 | 78.4 | 67.6 |

Peak Model Estimation | 82.2 | 72.2 | 77.2 | 66.1 | 73.7 | 70.1 |

**Table 4.**Classification Results of the random forest. The quality measures are the AUC, accuracy (ACC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).

AUC | ACC | Sensitivity | Speciﬁcity | PPV | NPV | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Manual VisualNow | 86.9 | 76.3 | 78.7 | 73.4 | 78.5 | 73.6 |

Local Maxima Search | 80.8 | 70.5 | 75 | 64.9 | 72.5 | 67.8 |

Automatic VisualNow | 81.1 | 71.9 | 75.6 | 67.3 | 74.1 | 69.1 |

Automatic IPHEx | 80 | 68.9 | 72.8 | 64 | 71.4 | 65.6 |

Peak Model Estimation | 81.9 | 74.2 | 81.6 | 65 | 74.2 | 74.1 |

**Data Robustness:**Figure 4 shows boxplots of the list of AUCs generated by 100 runs of the ten-fold cross validation. The prediction results of the linear SVM with the manual and automated VisualNow methods are the most stable, while the local maxima search shows the highest variation. The PME approach has a reasonable robustness and performs better than the simple methods in almost all runs. In comparison, the AUC-measured classification performance with random forest is most robust for the gold standard and the PME approach. The other automated methods introduce larger variations, in particular IPHEx.

**Figure 4.**Boxplots of 100 runs of the ten-fold cross validation for both, the linear SVM and the random forest method.

**Tuning Robustness:**Finally we investigate if the feature sets and their model performance are susceptible to parameter tuning for the worse performing classifier: the linear SVM. Therefore, we systematically vary the cost and tolerance parameters ({0.1,1.0,100,1000} and {0.01,0.1,1}, respectively) and in a second run we randomize the class labels. The result of this analysis is shown in Figure 5, which plots the variance of the AUC for both the original labels (left) as well as the randomized labels (right). The results of the robustness analysis of random forest is shown in the Appendix Figure A1.

**Figure 5.**Boxplots illustrating the variation within the linear SVM tuning results in a single ten-fold cross validation run. The yellow boxes show the results when tuning the original feature sets. The green boxes show the results when tuning the randomly labeled feature sets.

## 5. Conclusions

## Acknowledgements

## References

- Westhoff, M.; Litterst, P.; Maddula, S.; Bödeker, B.; Baumbach, J.I. Statistical and bioinformatical methods to differentiate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) including lung cancer from healthy control by breath analysis using ion mobility spectrometry. Int. J. Ion Mobil. Spectrom.
**2011**, 14, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Baumbach, J.I.; Westhoff, M. Ion mobility spectrometry to detect lung cancer and airway infections. Spectrosc. Eur.
**2006**, 18, 22–27. [Google Scholar] - Perl, T.; Juenger, M.; Vautz, W.; Nolte, J.; Kuhns, M.; Zepelin, B.; Quintel, M. Detection of characteristic metabolites of Aspergillus fumigatus and Candida species using ion mobility spectrometry-metabolic profiling by volatile organic compounds. Mycoses
**2011**, 54, 828–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ruzsanyi, V.; Mochalski, P.; Schmid, A.; Wiesenhofer, H.; Klieber, M.; Hinterhuber, H.; Amann, A. Ion mobility spectrometry for detection of skin volatiles. J. Chromatogr. B
**2012**, 911, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ruzsanyi, V.; Baumbach, J.I.; Sielemann, S.; Litterst, P.; Westhoff, M.; Freitag, L. Detection of human metabolites using multi-capillary columns coupled to ion mobility spectrometers. J. Chromatogr. A
**2005**, 1084, 145–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Baumbach, J.I. Ion mobility spectrometry coupled with multi-capillary columns for metabolic profiling of human breath. J. Breath Res.
**2009**, 3, 1–16. [Google Scholar] - B & S Analytik GmbH. Available online: http://www.bs-analytik.de/ (accessed on 15 March 2013).
- Purkhart, R.; Hillmann, A.; Graupner, R.; Becher, G. Detection of characteristic clusters in IMS-Spectrograms of exhaled air polluted with environmental contaminants. Int. J. Ion Mobil. Spectrom.
**2012**, 15, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bödeker, B.; Vautz, W.; Baumbach, J.I. Peak finding and referencing in MCC/IMS-data. Int. J. Ion Mobil. Spectrom.
**2008**, 11, 83–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bunkowski, A. MCC-IMS data analysis using automated spectra processing and explorative visualisation methods. PhD thesis, University Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Kopczynski, D.; Baumbach, J.I.; Rahmann, S. Peak Modeling for Ion Mobility Spectrometry Measurements. In Proceedings of 20th European Signal Processing Conference, Bucharest, Romania, 27–31 August 2012.
- Vogtland, D.; Baumbach, J.I. Breit-Wigner-function and IMS-signals. Int. J. Ion Mobil. Spectrom.
**2009**, 12, 109–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bader, S. Identification and Quantification of Peaks in Spectrometric Data. PhD thesis, TU Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Nixon, M.; Aguado, A.S. Feature Extraction & Image Processing, 2nd ed.; Academic Press: Waltham, MA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Savitzky, A.; Golay, M. Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures. Anal. Chem.
**1964**, 36, 1627–1639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hastie, T.; Tibshirani, R.; Friedman, J. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Bader, S.; Urfer, W.; Baumbach, J.I. Reduction of ion mobility spectrometry data by clustering characteristic peak structures. J. Chemom.
**2007**, 20, 128–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Vincent, L.; Soille, P. Watersheds in digital spaces: An efficient algorithm based on immersion simulations. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.
**1991**, 13, 583–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fong, S.S.; Rearden, P.; Kanchagar, C.; Sassetti, C.; Trevejo, J.; Brereton, R.G. Automated peak detection and matching algorithm for gas chromatography-differential mobility spectrometry. Anal. Chem.
**2011**, 83, 1537–1546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Boser, B.; Guyon, I.; Vapnik, V. A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Workshop on Computational Learning Theory, Pittsburgh, USA, 27–29 July 1992; pp. 144–152.
- Dimitriadou, E.; Hornik, K.; Leisch, F.; Meyer, D.; Weingessel, A. e1071: Misc Functions of the Department of Statistics (e1071), TU Wien; TU Wien: Vienna, Austria, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Liaw, A.; Wiener, M. Classification and regression by randomforest. R News
**2002**, 2, 18–22. [Google Scholar] - Robin, X.; Turck, N.; Hainard, A.; Tiberti, N.; Lisacek, F.; Sanchez, J.; M., M. pROC: An open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinforma.
**2011**, 12, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ion Mobility Spectroscopy Analysis with Restricted Resources Home Page. Available online: http://www.rahmannlab.de/research/ims (accessed on 15 March 2013).
- Collaborative Research Center SFB 876 -Providing Information by Resource-Constrained Data Analysis. Available online: http://sfb876.tu-dortmund.de (accessed on 15 March 2013).

## Appendix

**Figure A1.**Boxplots illustrating the variation within the random forest tuning results in a single ten-fold cross validation run. The yellow boxes show the results when tuning the original feature sets. The green boxes show the results when tuning the randomly labeled feature sets.

© 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Hauschild, A.-C.; Kopczynski, D.; D'Addario, M.; Baumbach, J.I.; Rahmann, S.; Baumbach, J. Peak Detection Method Evaluation for Ion Mobility Spectrometry by Using Machine Learning Approaches. *Metabolites* **2013**, *3*, 277-293.
https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo3020277

**AMA Style**

Hauschild A-C, Kopczynski D, D'Addario M, Baumbach JI, Rahmann S, Baumbach J. Peak Detection Method Evaluation for Ion Mobility Spectrometry by Using Machine Learning Approaches. *Metabolites*. 2013; 3(2):277-293.
https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo3020277

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Hauschild, Anne-Christin, Dominik Kopczynski, Marianna D'Addario, Jörg Ingo Baumbach, Sven Rahmann, and Jan Baumbach. 2013. "Peak Detection Method Evaluation for Ion Mobility Spectrometry by Using Machine Learning Approaches" *Metabolites* 3, no. 2: 277-293.
https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo3020277