Abstract:Non-targeted analysis provides a comprehensive approach to analyze environmental and biological samples for nearly all chemicals present. One of the main shortcomings of current analytical methods and workflows is that they are unable to provide any quantitative information constituting an important obstacle in understanding environmental fate and human exposure. Herein, we present an in silico quantification method using mahine-learning for chemicals analyzed using electrospray ionization (ESI). We considered three data sets from different instrumental setups: (i) capillary electrophoresis electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry (CE-MS) in positive ionization mode (ESI+), (ii) liquid chromatography quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (LC-QTOF/MS) in ESI+ and (iii) LC-QTOF/MS in negative ionization mode (ESI−). We developed and applied two different machine-learning algorithms: a random forest (RF) and an artificial neural network (ANN) to predict the relative response factors (RRFs) of different chemicals based on their physicochemical properties. Chemical concentrations can then be calculated by dividing the measured abundance of a chemical, as peak area or peak height, by its corresponding RRF. We evaluated our models and tested their predictive power using 5-fold cross-validation (CV) and y randomization. Both the RF and the ANN models showed great promise in predicting RRFs. However, the accuracy of the predictions was dependent on the data set composition and the experimental setup. For the CE-MS ESI+ data set, the best model predicted measured RRFs with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.19 log units and a cross-validation coefficient of determination (Q2) of 0.84 for the testing set. For the LC-QTOF/MS ESI+ data set, the best model predicted measured RRFs with an MAE of 0.32 and a Q2 of 0.40. For the LC-QTOF/MS ESI– data set, the best model predicted measured RRFs with a MAE of 0.50 and a Q2 of 0.20. Our findings suggest that machine-learning algorithms can be used for predicting concentrations of nontargeted chemicals with reasonable uncertainties, especially in ESI+, while the application on ESI– remains a more challenging problem.The Supporting Information is available free of charge at <a class="ext-link" href="/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01096?goto=supporting-info">https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01096</a>.Chemical names and physicochemical descriptors of the chemicals in the CE-MS ESI+ data set (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01096/suppl_file/ci9b01096_si_001.xlsx">XLSX</a>)Chemical names and physicochemical descriptors of the chemicals in the LC-QTOF/MS data sets (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01096/suppl_file/ci9b01096_si_002.xlsx">XLSX</a>)Information on the design of the algorithms and the optimization of the hyperparameters (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01096/suppl_file/ci9b01096_si_003.pdf">PDF</a>)This article has not yet been cited by other publications.

Validation of the identification reliability of known and assumed UDMH transformation products using gas chromatographic retention indices and machine learning

Intelligent Workflow and Software for Non-Target Analysis of Complex Samples Using a Mixture of Toxic Transformation Products of Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine as an Example

Quantification of Transformation Products of Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine in Water Using SPME and GC-MS

Comparative Prediction of Gas Chromatographic Retention Indices for GC/MS Identification of Chemicals Related to Chemical Weapons Convention by Incremental and Machine Learning Methods

Predicting the Thermodynamic Characteristics of New Products of N,N-Dimethylhydrazine Transformation in the Gas Phase

Using retention index database matching for compound identification on a non-standard gas chromatography stationary phase

Rapid determination of 1,1-dimethylhydrazine transformation products in soil by accelerated solvent extraction coupled with gas chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry

Ready‐to‐use Models Built Using a Diverse Set of 266 Aroma Compounds for the Estimation of Gas Chromatographic Retention Indices for the 50%‐Cyanopropylphenyl‐50%‐Dimethylpolysiloxane Stationary Phase

Evaluating Retention Index Score Assumptions to Refine GC-MS Metabolite Identification

Determination of 1,1-Dimethylhydrazine and its Transformation Products in Soil by Zwitterionic Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine and related compounds in the environment: Recent updates on pretreatment, analysis, and removal techniques

Critical evaluation of the NIST retention index database reliability with specific examples

Headspace – Solid phase microextraction vs liquid injection GC-MS analysis of essential oils: Prediction of linear retention indices by multiple linear regression

Predicting the Activity of Unidentified Chemicals in Complementary Bioassays from the HRMS Data to Pinpoint Potential Endocrine Disruptors

Evaluation of Ion Mobility Spectrometry for Improving Constitutional Assignment in Natural Product Mixtures

New Trends in Chemical Identification Methodology

Applications of Machine Learning to In Silico Quantification of Chemicals without Analytical Standards

Comparison of Compound Identification Tools Using Data Dependent and Data Independent High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Spectra

Statistically sound identification of compounds by low-resolution GC-MS: Identification of tear agents in tear gas sprays

Auto-deconvolution and molecular networking of gas chromatography–mass spectrometry data

Nitrogen-containing cyclic compounds as iminium ion sources for selected reaction monitoring detection of derivatized analytes