Cited by 1,471Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesStatistical Methods and Applications

Assessment of PLSDA Cross Validation

Open access
Westerhuis, Johan A., Hoefsloot, Huub C. J., Smit, Suzanne, Vis, Daniel J., Smilde, Age K., van Velzen, Ewoud J. J., van Duijnhoven, John P. M., van Dorsten, Ferdi A.·2008·Metabolomics

Abstract

Classifying groups of individuals based on their metabolic profile is one of the main topics in metabolomics research. Due to the low number of individuals compared to the large number of variables, this is not an easy task. PLSDA is one of the data analysis methods used for the classification. Unfortunately this method eagerly overfits the data and rigorous validation is necessary. The validation however is far from straightforward. Is this paper we will discuss a strategy based on cross model validation and permutation testing to validate the classification models. It is also shown that too optimistic results are obtained when the validation is not done properly. Furthermore, we advocate against the use of PLSDA score plots for inference of class differences.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11306-007-0099-6

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The developed PLS-DA model was validated using leave one out cross validation and 1000 times permutation tests, with quality assessed on R2 and Q2 scores.

    “The developed PLS-DA model was validated using the leave one out cross validation method, and its quality was assessed on R2 and Q2 scores [36]. Furthermore, this model was validated using 1000 times permutation tests [36].”

    From Comprehensive Metabolomic Fingerprinting Combined with Chemometrics Identifies Species- and Variety-Specific Variation of Medicinal Herbs: An Ocimum Study (2023) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Data analysis section (3.4; page unavailable) uses leave-one-out cross-validation only in an inner loop; its main single- and double-cross-validation procedures use six folds. Quality assessment (4.2; page unavailable) assesses Q2, but not R2, and reports 2,000 permutations rather than 1,000. The paper therefore supports the general use of cross-validation, Q2 and permutation testing for PLS-DA, but not the stated combination of methods and counts. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The developed PLS-DA model was validated using a ten-fold cross-validation method.

    “The developed PLS-DA model was validated using a ten-fold cross validation method, and its quality was assessed on R2, Q2, and accuracy scores [26].”

    From Rapid metabolic fingerprinting with the aid of chemometric models to identify authenticity of natural medicines: Turmeric, Ocimum, and Withania somnifera study (2023) · cites this paper as [26]

    Section 2.3 supports cross-validation as a way to validate PLS-DA models, and Section 2.5 discusses Q² and classification errors as quality measures. But Section 3.4 says this paper used six-fold cross-validation, not ten-fold, and the cited passages do not establish R² as an assessment score. The source therefore supports the general approach, not all the specific methods and scores in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Breiman, L. (1998). Arcing classifiers. Annals of Statistics, 26(3), 801-824.
  2. Martens, H., Dijksterhuis, G. B., & Byrne, D. V. (2000). Power of experimental designs, estimated by Monte Carlo simulation. Journal of Chemometrics, 14(5-6), 441-462.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Westerhuis, J. A., Hoefsloot, H. C. J., Smit, S., Vis, D. J., Smilde, A. K., van Velzen, E. J. J., van Duijnhoven, J. P. M., & van Dorsten, F. A.
Affiliations
University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Westerhuis, Johan A.
Venue
Metabolomics
Published
2008-01-24
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
81-89
ISSN
  • 1573-3882 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3890
OpenAlex
W1992483596
Cited by
1,471
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 82 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 90 · 2023: 92 · 2022: 109 · 2021: 116 · 2020: 101 · 2019: 90 · 2018: 96 · 2017: 82 · 2016: 92 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 85 · 2013: 95 · 2012: 81
FWCI
16.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Metabolomics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Spectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
PLS-DA, cross-validation, permutation tests, overfitting, metabolic profile, model validation, score plots, class differences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review