Quantitative Identification of Volatile Organics by SAW Sensor Transients ‒ Comparative Performance Analysis of Fuzzy Inference and Partial-Least-Square-Regression Methods

  • Prashant SinghEmail author
  • R. D. S. Yadava
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 247)


We present a comparative performance analysis between three methods (fuzzy c-means and fuzzy subtractive clustering based fuzzy inference systems and partial-least-square regression) for simultaneous determination of vapor identity and concentration in gas sensing applications. Taking poly-isobutylene coated surface acoustic wave sensor transients for measurements we analyzed simulated data for seven volatile organic compounds by applying these methods as a function of polymer film thickness. The sensor transients were represented by discrete wavelet approximation coefficients. It is found that PLS regression performs most optimally for both discrimination between vapor identities and simultaneous estimation of their concentration.


SAW sensor transients quantitative recognition discrete wavelet decomposition fuzzy inference system partial-least-square regression 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Yadava, R.D.S.: Modeling, Simulation and Information Processing for Development of a Polymeric Electronic Nose System. In: Korotcenkov, G. (ed.) Chemical Sensors – Simulation and Modelling, ch. 10, pp. 411–502. Momentum Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vilanova, X., Llobet, E., Alcubilla, R., Sueiras, J.E., Correig, X.: Analysis of the Conduc-tance Transient in Thick-Film Tin Oxide Gas Sensors. Sens. Actuat. B 31, 175–180 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Llobet, E., Brezmes, J., Vilanova, X., Sueiras, J.: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds Using Transient and Steady-State Responses of Thick-Film Tin Oxide Gas Sensor Array. Sens. Actuat. B 41, 13–21 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hines, E.L., Llobet, E., Gardner, J.W.: Electronic noses: A review of signal processing techniques. IEE Proc. Circuits, Devices System 156, 297–309 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Osuna, R.G., Nagle, H.T., Schiffman, S.S.: Transient Response Analysis of an Electronic Nose Using Multi-Exponential Models. Sens. Actuat. B 61, 170–182 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoyt, S., McKennoch, S., Wilson, D.M.: Transient Response Chemical Discrimination Module. Proc. of IEEE Sensors 1, 376–381 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Phaisangittisagul, E., Nagle, H.T.: Sensor Selection for Machine Olfaction Based on Tran-sient Feature Extraction. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 57, 369–378 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pearce, T.C., Schiffman, S.S., Nagle, H.T., Gardner, J.W.: Handbook of Machine Olfaction. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Francesco, F.D., Fuoco, R., Trivella, M.G., Ceccarini, A.: Breath Analysis: Trends in Techniques and Clinical Applications. Microchem. J. 79, 405–410 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tothil, I.E.: Rapid and On-Line Instrumentation for Food Quality Assurance. CRC Press (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rogers, E.K.: Handbook of Biosensors and Electronic Noses: Medicine, Food and the Environment. CRC Press (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh, P., Yadava, R.D.S.: Effect of Film Thickness and Viscoelasticity on Separability of Vapour Classes by Wavelet and Principal Component Analyses of Polymer-Coated Surface Acoustic Wave Sensor Transients. Meas. Sci. Technol. 22, 025202 (15pp) (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Singh, P., Yadava, R.D.S.: Enhancing Chemical Identification Efficiency by SAW Sensor Transients Through a Data Enrichment and Information Fusion Strategy—A Simulation Study. Meas. Sci. Technol. 24, 055109 (13pp) (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Singh, P., Yadava, R.D.S.: A Fusion Approach to Feature Extraction by Wavelet Decom-position and Principal Component Analysis in Transient Signal Processing of SAW Odor Sensor Array. Sens. Transducers J. 126, 64–73 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Singh, P., Yadava, R.D.S.: Feature Extraction by Wavelet Decomposition of Surface Acoustic Wave Sensor Array Transients. Def. Sci. J. 60, 377–386 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singh, P., Yadava, R.D.S.: Discrete Wavelet Transform and Principal Component Analysis Based Vapor Discrimination by Optimizing Sense-and-Purge Cycle Duration of SAW Chemical Sensor Transients. In: IEEE Conf. on Computational Intelligence and Signal Proc-essing (CISP 2012), pp. 71–75 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singh, P., Yadava, R.D.S.: Wavelet Based Fuzzy Inference System for Simultaneous Identification and Quantitation of Volatile Organic Compounds Using SAW Sensor Transients. In: Panigrahi, B.K., Suganthan, P.N., Das, S., Satapathy, S.C. (eds.) SEMCCO 2011, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7077, pp. 319–327. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burrus, C.S., Gopinath, R.A., Guo, H.: Introduction to Wavelets and Wavelet Transforms: A Primer. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martin, S.J., Frye, G.C., Senturia, S.D.: Dynamics and Response of Polymer-Coated Sur-face Acoustic Wave Devices: Effect of Viscoelastic Properties and Film Resonance. Analyt. Chem. 66, 2201–2219 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yadava, R.D.S., Kshetrimayuma, R., Khaneja, M.: Multifrequency Characterization of Viscoelastic Polymers and Vapor Sensing Based on SAW Oscillators. Ultrasonics 49, 638–645 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bezdek, J.: Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms. Plenum Press, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bezdek, J.C., Ehrlich, R., Full, W.: FCM: The Fuzzy c-Means Clustering Algorithm. Comp. & Geosciences 10, 191–203 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chiu, S.: Fuzzy Model Identification Based on Cluster Estimation. J. of Intelligent & Fuzzy Syst. 2, 267–278 (1994)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chiu, S.: Extracting Fuzzy Rules from Data for Function Approximation and Pattern Classification. In: Dubois, D., Prade, H., Yager, R. (eds.) Fuzzy Information Engineering: A Guided Tour of Applications, ch. 9. John Wiley & Sons, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Adams, M.J.: Chemometrics in Analytical Spectroscopy. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Geladi, P., Kowalski, R.: Partial Least Squares Regression (PLS): A Tutorial. Analytica Chimica Acta 185, 1–17 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wold, S., Sjöström, M., Eriksson, L.: PLS-Regression: A Basic Tool of Chemometrics. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 58, 109–130 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abdi, H.: Partial Least Squares Regression. In: Lewis, B.M., Bryman, A., Futing, T. (eds.) Encyclopaedia of Social Science Research Methods Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tan, Y., Shi, L., Tong, W., Hwang, G.T.G., Wang, C.: Multi-Class Tumor Classification by Discriminant Partial Least Squares. Comput. Bio. and Chem. 28, 235–244 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physics, College of EngineeringTeerthanker Mahaveer UniversityMoradabadIndia
  2. 2.Sensors and Signal Processing Laboratory, Department of Physics, Faculty of ScienceBanaras Hindu UniversityVaranasiIndia

Personalised recommendations