The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting Ion Mobility Collision Cross-Sections Using a Deep Neural Network: DeepCCS
Open accessAbstract
Untargeted metabolomic measurements using mass spectrometry are a powerful tool for uncovering new small molecules with environmental and biological importance. The small molecule identification step, however, still remains an enormous challenge due to fragmentation difficulties or unspecific fragment ion information. Current methods to address this challenge are often dependent on databases or require the use of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), which have their own difficulties. The use of the gas-phase collision cross section (CCS) values obtained from ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) measurements were recently demonstrated to reduce the number of false positive metabolite identifications. While promising, the amount of empirical CCS information currently available is limited, thus predictive CCS methods need to be developed. In this article, we expand upon current experimental IMS capabilities by predicting the CCS values using a deep learning algorithm. We successfully developed and trained a prediction model for CCS values requiring only information about a compound's SMILES notation and ion type. The use of data from five different laboratories using different instruments allowed the algorithm to be trained and tested on more than 2400 molecules. The resulting CCS predictions were found to achieve a coefficient of determination of 0.97 and median relative error of 2.7% for a wide range of molecules. Furthermore, the method requires only a small amount of processing power to predict CCS values. Considering the performance, time, and resources necessary, as well as its applicability to a variety of molecules, this model was able to outperform all currently available CCS prediction algorithms.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
Sumner, L. W., Amberg, A., Barrett, D., Beale, M. H., Beger, R., Daykin, C. A., Fan, T. W.-M., Fiehn, O., Goodacre, R., Griffin, J. L., et al. (2007) · Metabolomics · doi:10.1007/s11306-007-0082-2 · Cited by 5,368
Ehteshami Bejnordi, B., Veta, M., Johannes van Diest, P., van Ginneken, B., Karssemeijer, N., Litjens, G., van der Laak, J. A. W. M., and the CAMELYON16 Consortium, Hermsen, M., Manson, Q. F., et al. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14585 · Cited by 3,293
Cited by
DrugBank 6.0: the DrugBank Knowledgebase for 2024
Knox, C., Wilson, M., Klinger, C. M., Franklin, M., Oler, E., Wilson, A., Pon, A., Cox, J., Chin, N. E. (., Strawbridge, S. A., et al. (2024) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkad976 · Cited by 1,727
Ion Mobility Spectrometry: Fundamental Concepts, Instrumentation, Applications, and the Road Ahead
Dodds, J. N., & Baker, E. S. (2019) · Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · doi:10.1007/s13361-019-02288-2 · Cited by 574
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Plante, P.-L., Francovic-Fontaine, É., May, J. C., McLean, J. A., Baker, E. S., Laviolette, F., Marchand, M., & Corbeil, J.
- Venue
- Analytical Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2019-04-01
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 5191-5199
- ISSN
- 0003-2700 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6882
- OpenAlex
- W2925495008
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting Ion Mobility Collision Cross-Sections Using a Deep Neural Network: DeepCCS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b05821
- The paper
- Plante, P.-L., Francovic-Fontaine, É., May, J. C., McLean, J. A., Baker, E. S., Laviolette, F., Marchand, M., & Corbeil, J. (2019). Predicting Ion Mobility Collision Cross-Sections Using a Deep Neural Network: DeepCCS. Analytical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b05821
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.