Submitted:
30 April 2024
Posted:
01 May 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Data Acquisition
2.3. Data Pre-Treatment and Pre-Processing
2.4. Feature Selection
2.5. Classification Model
3. Results
3.1. NMR Results
3.2. Classification of Neat Petrol Classes
3.3. Classification of Weathered Petrol Classes
3.3. Classification Model for Native, Evaporated and Burnt Petrol Sources.
3.4. Blind Study
4. Discussion and Conclusion
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bumbrah, S. Gurvinder, Sarin. K. Rajinder and Sharma M. Rakesh. Analysis of Petroleum Products in Fire Debris Residues by Gas Chromatography: A Literature review. Arab Journal of Forensic Sciences and Forensic Medicine 2017, 1(5), pp.512-534.
- Ugena, L., Moncayo, S., Manzoor, S., Rosales, D. and Cáceres, J. Identification and Discrimination of Brands of Fuels by Gas Chromatography and Neural Networks Algorithm in Forensic Research. Journal of Analytical Methods in Chemistry 2016, pp.1-7. [CrossRef]
- Desa, W. The Discrimination of Ignitable Liquids and Ignitable Liquid Residues using Chemometric Analysis. PhD, University of Strathclyde, UK,2012.
- Monfreda M, Gregori A. Differentiation of unevaporated gasoline samples according to their brands, by SPME-GC-MS and multivariate statistical analysis. J Forensic Sci. 2011 Mar;56(2):372-80. [CrossRef]
- Barnett, I., Bailey, F. and Zhang, M. Detection and Classification of Ignitable Liquid Residues in the Presence of Matrix Interferences by Using Direct Analysis in Real Time Mass Spectrometry, Journal of Forensic Sciences 2019, 64(5), pp.1486-1494. [CrossRef]
- Novoa-Carballal, R., Fernandez-Megia, E., Jimenez, C. and Riguera, R. NMR methods for unravelling the spectra of complex mixtures. Natural product reports 2011, 28(1), pp.78-98. [CrossRef]
- Flumignan, D.L., Boralle, N. and De Oliveira, J.E. Screening Brazilian commercial gasoline quality by hydrogen nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopic fingerprinting and pattern-recognition multivariate chemometric analysis. Talanta 2010, 82(1), pp.99-105. [CrossRef]
- Monteiro, M., Ambrozin, A., Lião, L., Boffo, E., Tavares, L., Ferreira, M. and Ferreira, A. Study of Brazilian Gasoline Quality Using Hydrogen Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (1H NMR) Spectroscopy and Chemometrics. Energy & Fuels 2009, 23(1), pp.272-279. [CrossRef]
- Obeidat, M. Safwan. The Use of 1H NMR and PCA for Quality Assessment of Gasoline of Different Octane Number.Appl Magn Reason 2015,46, pp.875-883.16. [CrossRef]
- Obeidat, S. and Alomary, A. Multivariate Calibration and 1H NMR Spectroscopy for Uncovering Fuel Adulteration. Applied Magnetic Resonance 2006, 47(11), pp.1273-1282.
- Sun, C. and Wang, Z. 1H NMR application in characterizing the refinery products of gasoline.
- Pagano, B., Lauri, I., De Tito, S., Persico, G., Chini, M.G., Malmendal, A., Novellino, E. and Randazzo, A. Use of NMR in profiling of cocaine seizures. Forensic science international 2013, 231(1-3), pp.120-124. [CrossRef]
- Takano H, et al., J Forensic Leg Investig Sci 2019, 5: 041. [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, F.The use of Artificial Intelligence in digital forensics: An introduction, Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review 2010, vol. 7, pp. 35-41. [CrossRef]
- Autilia Vitiello, Ciro Di Nunzio, Luciano Garofano, Maurizio Saliva, Pietrantonio Ricci, Giovanni Acampora, Bloodstain pattern analysis as optimization problem, Forensic Science International 2016,266, Pages e79-e85, ISSN 0379-0738. [CrossRef]
- Chinnikatti, S. Artificial Intelligence in Forensic Science. Forensic Science & Addiction Research 2018, 2. [CrossRef]
- Christopher Rigano. Using Artificial Intelligence to Address Criminal Justice Needs. NIJ Journal 280, January 2019, https://www.nij.gov/journals/280/Pages/using-artificialintelligence-to-address-criminal-justice-needs.aspx.
- Cobas, J.C., Bernstein, M.A., Martín-Pastor, M. and Tahoces, P.G. A new general-purpose fully automatic baseline-correction procedure for 1D and 2D NMR data. Journal of Magnetic Resonance 2006, 183(1), pp.145-151. [CrossRef]
- Nawaiseh, A. Audit opinion decision using artifical intelligence techniques: empirical study of UK and Ireland. Ph. D, Brunel University, UK,2021.
- Singh, D. and Singh, B. Investigating the impact of data normalization on classification performance. Applied Soft Computing 2020, 97, p.105524. [CrossRef]
- McIlroy, J., Smith, R. and McGuffin, V. Assessing the effect of data pretreatment procedures for principal components analysis of chromatographic data. Forensic Science International 2015, 257, pp.1-12. [CrossRef]
- Olawode, E.O., Tandlich,R, and Cambray G. 1H-NMR Profiling and Chemometric Analysis of Selected Honeys from South Africa, Zambia, and Slovakia. Molecules 2018, 23, p.578. [CrossRef]



| 1) The summary table which contains the neat petrol samples used for building the double-blind study. | ||
| Blind Samples Name | Class | |
| BLIND A | Jet | |
| BLIND B | Esso I (from regions) | different |
| BLIND C | Esso II | |
| BLIND D | Esso III | |
| BLIND E | Texaco I | |
| BLIND F | Texaco II | |
| BLIND G | Shell I | |
| BLIND H | BP M | |
| BLIND I | Shell II | |
| BLIND J | BP S | |
| 2) The summary table which contains the evaporated, burnt and burnt on substrate petrol used for double blind study. | ||
| Blind Exhibits Name | CLASS | Weathered Status |
| BLIND EXHIBIT A | BP M | Evaporated 50% |
| BLIND EXHIBIT B | BP M | Cardboard Substrate |
| BLIND EXHIBIT C | JET | Burnt |
| BLIND EXHIBIT D | JET | Evaporated 25% |
| BLIND EXHIBIT E | ESSO | Evaporated 25% |
| BLIND EXHIBIT F | SHELL | Cardboard Substrate |
| BLIND EXHIBIT G | SHELL | Burnt |
| BLIND EXHIBIT H | TEXACO | Burnt |
| BLIND EXHIBIT I | TEXACO | Evaporated 25% |
| Dataset | Classifier | PCA |
Feature Selection |
k-folds | BP S | BP M | Jet | Esso | Shell | Texaco |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entire 1H NMR spectra | Ensemble | √ | 5 | 92.3% | 91.7% | |||||
| Entire 1H NMR spectra | SVM | √ | 10 | 100% | 71.4% | 83.3% | ||||
| Olefins Region | NN | √ | 5 | 76.9% | 66.7% | |||||
| Olefins Region | NN | √ | 10 | 92.3% | 75% | |||||
| 3-methyl-2-butene | NN | √ | 10 | 100% | 83.3% | 88.9% | 100% | |||
| 3-methyl-2-butene | Ensemble | √ | 5 | 91.7% | 66.7% | 62.5% | 77.8% | 90% | ||
| Mixture of 3-methyl-2-butene and 1-pentene | Ensemble | √ | 5 | n/a | 100% | 100% | ||||
| Mixture of 3-methyl-2-butene and 1-pentene | kNN | √ | 10 | n/a | 66.7% | 76% | ||||
| 2-methyl-2-butene | SVM | √ | 10 | n/a | 66.7% | 85.7% | 76 % | |||
| 2-methyl-2-butene | Ensemble | √ | 5 | n/a | 71.4% | 71.4% | 66.7% | 69.2% | ||
| Cis and trans-2-pentene | Linear Discriminant |
√ | 10 | 85.7% | 71.4% | 60% | 60% | 83.3% | ||
| Cis and trans-2-pentene | Ensemble | √ | 10 | 100% | 71.4% | 60% | 60% | 83.3% | ||
| Combined Olefins | Ensemble | √ | 10 | 100% | 77.8% | 71.4% | 71.4% | 77.8% | 76.9% | |
| Combined Olefins | Ensemble | √ | 10 | 100% | 66.7% | 71.4% | 71.4% | 88.9% | 76.9% |
| Dataset | Classifier | k-folds | BP S | BP M | Jet | Esso | Shell | Texaco |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neat Combined | Linear Discriminant | 5 | 85.7% | 88.9% | 76.9% | |||
| Evaporated petrol samples | NN | 10 | 75% | 60% | ||||
| Neat and Evaporated petrol samples | NN | 10 | 60% | 69.2% | 70.6% | |||
| Neat, Evaporated, Burnt and Substrates petrol samples | NN | 5 | 100% | 62.5% |
| SAMPLE N | CLASS | Native vs Evaporated | Predicted Class by NMR hierarchical Classifier | ATD-GC-MS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLIND A | JET | native | ESSO | Identified as unique petrol source |
| BLIND B | ESSO | native | SHELL | Identified as unique petrol source or similar to J, E, F and H |
| BLIND C | ESSO | native | ESSO | Sample G identified as similar to Sample C |
| BLIND D | ESSO | native | ESSO | Sample D identified to be similar to Sample I |
| BLIND E | TEXACO | native | TEXACO | Sample E and F identified as same petrol source |
| BLIND F | TEXACO | native | TEXACO | Sample E and F identified as same petrol source |
| BLIND G | SHELL | native | SHELL | Sample G identified as similar to Sample C |
| BLIND H | BP M | native | BP M | Sample H and J are grouped with Texaco petrol source |
| BLIND I | SHELL | native | SHELL | Sample I identified as similar to Sample D |
| BLIND J | BP S | native | BP S | Sample H and J are grouped with Texaco petrol source |
| SAMPLE N | CLASS | Native vs Weathered | BP M Classifier |
Jet Classifier |
Esso Classifier | Shell/Texaco Classifier |
Predicted Class by NMR hierarchical Classifier | ATD-GC-MS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLIND A | BP M 50% evaporated | Weathered | BP M | BP M | No differentiation achieved | |||
| BLIND B | BP M on cardboard | Weathered | BP M | BP M | Differentiate as different petrol source | |||
| BLIND C | JET burnt | Weathered | others | JET | JET | No differentiation achieved | ||
| BLIND D | JET 25% evaporated | Weathered | others | JET | JET | No differentiation achieved | ||
| BLIND E | ESSO 25% evaporated | Weathered | others | others | ESSO | ESSO | No differentiation achieved | |
| BLIND F | SHELL on cardboard | Weathered | others | others | others | SHELL | SHELL | No differentiation achieved |
| BLIND G | SHELL burnt | Weathered | others | others | others | TEXACO | TEXACO | No differentiation achieved |
| BLIND H | TEXACO burnt | Weathered | others | others | others | TEXACO | TEXACO | No differentiation achieved |
| BLIND I | TEXACO 25% evaporated | Weathered | others | others | ESSO | ESSO | No differentiate achieved |
| Classifier | Overall Accuracy % | Classification |
|---|---|---|
| Linear Discriminant | 98.5 | Native vs Weathered |
| Ensemble | 80 | BP S vs BP M vs Jet vs Texaco vs Shell vs Esso |
| k-NN | 84.4 | BP M vs other petrol brands |
| Logistic Regression | 82.4 | Jet vs other petrol brands |
| ANN | 82.1 | Esso vs other petrol brands |
| ANN | 60 | Texaco vs Shell |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).