Last updated: 2019-08-07
Checks: 2 0
Knit directory: polymeRID/
This reproducible R Markdown analysis was created with workflowr (version 1.4.0.9000). The Checks tab describes the reproducibility checks that were applied when the results were created. The Past versions tab lists the development history.
Great! Since the R Markdown file has been committed to the Git repository, you know the exact version of the code that produced these results.
Great! You are using Git for version control. Tracking code development and connecting the code version to the results is critical for reproducibility. The version displayed above was the version of the Git repository at the time these results were generated.
Note that you need to be careful to ensure that all relevant files for the analysis have been committed to Git prior to generating the results (you can use wflow_publish
or wflow_git_commit
). workflowr only checks the R Markdown file, but you know if there are other scripts or data files that it depends on. Below is the status of the Git repository when the results were generated:
Ignored files:
Ignored: .Rhistory
Ignored: .Rproj.user/
Ignored: fun/
Ignored: output/natural/
Ignored: output/svm/
Ignored: output/testRunII/
Ignored: output/testRunIII/
Ignored: smp/20190802_1224_FUSION/files/
Ignored: smp/20190802_1224_FUSION/plots/
Ignored: smp/20190805_1118_FUSION/
Untracked files:
Untracked: Rplots.pdf
Untracked: analysis/assets/
Untracked: docs/assets/
Untracked: mod/20190805_1042/
Untracked: packrat/
Untracked: smp/20190805_1048_FUSION/
Untracked: smp/20190805_1057_SG/
Untracked: smp/20190805_1120_FUSION/
Unstaged changes:
Modified: .Rprofile
Modified: .gitignore
Modified: analysis/_site.yml
Modified: calibration.R
Modified: classification.R
Modified: code/functions.R
Modified: code/plotTestRun.R
Modified: code/setup.R
Note that any generated files, e.g. HTML, png, CSS, etc., are not included in this status report because it is ok for generated content to have uncommitted changes.
These are the previous versions of the R Markdown and HTML files. If you’ve configured a remote Git repository (see ?wflow_git_remote
), click on the hyperlinks in the table below to view them.
File | Version | Author | Date | Message |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rmd | 7a32e1f | goergen95 | 2019-08-07 | included images in index |
html | 99906c8 | goergen95 | 2019-08-07 | Build site. |
Rmd | 7b2bbac | goergen95 | 2019-08-07 | changed theme |
html | 5f2ca49 | goergen95 | 2019-08-07 | Build site. |
Rmd | caf89e2 | goergen95 | 2019-08-07 | wflow_publish(c(“analysis/index.Rmd”)) |
html | 348ad0a | goergen95 | 2019-08-05 | Build site. |
Rmd | 5b8a2e6 | goergen95 | 2019-08-05 | wflow_publish(c(“analysis/index.Rmd”)) |
Rmd | 6c813f4 | goergen95 | 2019-07-29 | implemented workflowr |
Rmd | d525cc2 | goergen95 | 2019-07-29 | Start workflowr project. |
Here I present the results of my work for a master’s seminar at the University of Marburg concerned with microplastic in the environment.
Photo of two sediment separators taken by Sarah Brüning
The seminar was placed in the context of a research project between the working group of Soil and Water Ecosystems at the Institute of Geography and the working group of Semiconductor Photonics at the Institute of Physics. It was conducted jointly by Prof. Dr. Peter Chifflard and MSc Julia Prume and was focused on the analysis of envrionmental samples to answer different geographical questions about the how and then of microplastic particles moving in water ecosystems.
While the most projects during the seminar were focusing on these important geographical questions I set out my project to actually ease the cumbersome process of categorizing FTIR spectra of particles wihtin the samples to polymer classes. The idea was that up-to-date machine learning models applied to the high-dimensional spectral data of particles found in samples could minimize the need for human intervention in the classifcation process and thus significantly speed up the process of categorizing particles to reference polymers.
To achieve this aim this project consisted of basically four distinguishable work steps. These are:
Average spectrum of PET samples in the database