1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9673(97)01025-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantitative structure–retention relationship studies for predicting the gas chromatography retention indices of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…SMR was implemented by SPSS 13.0; each standard regression coefficient in regression process is presented in Supporting Table 1 (online version). The obtained original variable matrix by SMR was then subject to a partial least square (PLS) regression modeling and the optimal model was determined when cross-validation correlative coefficients ( ) in leave one out cross-2 cum Q 5,11,17,20,24, and the maximum value appeared when it was 17, several PLS models were built by combining the above variables and the related statistics data are presented in Table 2. 3D-HoVAIF descriptors were employed to study QSRR of 33 purine bases, and the resulting correlative statistics from models and some reported results [15] are listed in Table 2.…”
Section: Constructing Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…SMR was implemented by SPSS 13.0; each standard regression coefficient in regression process is presented in Supporting Table 1 (online version). The obtained original variable matrix by SMR was then subject to a partial least square (PLS) regression modeling and the optimal model was determined when cross-validation correlative coefficients ( ) in leave one out cross-2 cum Q 5,11,17,20,24, and the maximum value appeared when it was 17, several PLS models were built by combining the above variables and the related statistics data are presented in Table 2. 3D-HoVAIF descriptors were employed to study QSRR of 33 purine bases, and the resulting correlative statistics from models and some reported results [15] are listed in Table 2.…”
Section: Constructing Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the past significant work has been done for QSRR [1,2] researches, for retention index predictions, separation condition selections and retention mechanism exploration [3] . For example, QSRR models [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] were established by introducing such descriptors as molecular geometrical characteristics, topological structures and diversities of physicochemical parameters. However, it was difficult to construct QSRR model for organic and biological molecules because they were based on 2D structures without considering interactions among compounds, fixed phase and fluxion phase.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The values for these five variables have been collected from the GRAND PAH-spectrum database developed at Stockholm University [29]. Electronic properties such as conjugated p-electron surface [28], electron density or electron density distribution [24] have also been suggested as descriptor for GC chromatographic separation. We thus retained parameters describing the hexacyclic PAH p-electron system, such as Hückel p-electron energy (Ep), the difference between coefficients of the highest occupied molecular orbital and lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (Dx), and Kekule counts.…”
Section: Gc Retention Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, the connection features of molecular geometry, the molecular topology structure, various physical and chemical parameters, etc. were used to describe molecular structures, and multiple linear regression (MLR) was used to establish QSRRs to predict retention values of compounds [3][4][5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%