The present disclosure relates to a method to obtain and validate an instrument calibration. In particular, random errors could be minimized by averaging the fitting equation coefficients. This method could be very useful for modern analytical measurement where high accuracy is desired, for example high resolution mass spectrometers.
As instrumental parameters and a sample introduction may fluctuate or drift slightly, it is necessary to perform a calibration of the instrument before measuring the masses of unknown ions. The calibration is done by acquiring signals of known compounds and measuring the instrument's detector response. Then a software uses an approximation method to obtain constants of a calibration equation of a chosen function.
m
s=ƒ(r) (1)
where ms is the standard or reference ion mass, and r is the instrument's response.
The obtained calibration equation is used in subsequent measurements to calculate masses of unknown analyte ions from the instrument's response signal, as
m
i=ƒ(r) (2)
where mi is the mass of measured ion, and r is the instrument's response.
Several different types of calibration functions are used for approximation, linear, quadratic, cubic, logarithmic, exponential, etc. The type of particular calibration function to which an instrument response is approximated depends on various parameters, as instrument geometry, ion pathways, etc. For example, if a quadratic calibration function is used for a MALDI-TOF (matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight) instruments
m
i
=Aτ
i
2
Bτ
i
C (3)
three constants, A, B and C, must be obtained by a curve fitting method, using standard reference compounds and the detector response, which in this case is an ion arrival time τi.
Once the constants of the calibration function (2) are obtained, the instrument is considered to be calibrated, so it is assumed that the function (2) calculates the masses of unknown ions adequately and the masses of ions obtained by the function (2) are accurate.
During measurements, the instrument response for the same mass of ion fluctuates slightly due to various instabilities in the instrument and the measurement process, so only determined from the signal values that deviate within a permitted error from the theoretical mass are accepted. A need exists to develop an efficient approach for instrument calibrations that produces a calibration function generating minimum mass errors.
This patent document discloses methods and systems meeting the challenges in instrument calibrations. The methods and systems can be applied to the calibrations of modern highly accurate instruments, especially if this method is used for mass calibrations of high resolution mass spectrometers.
An aspect of the patent document provides a method of calibrating an instrument to reduce random errors in determining an attribute of one or more samples. The method includes
In some embodiments, the method further includes
The attribute can be anything characteristics of a substance, including for example, mass, density, volume, viscosity, wavelength, speed, temperature, power and frequency. In some embodiments, the attribute is mass of the sample.
In some embodiments, the mass and the average of one or more calibration constants are in an equation as follows:
m
s
=A
aveτs2+Baveτs+Cave
where, τs is sample arrival time, Aave, Bave, and Cave, are averaged values of calibration constants from valid calibrations performed during longtime use of the instrument and calculated as is
In some embodiments, the predetermine number is calculated according to the following equation,
wherein z is z-value corresponding to desired confidence level, σ is standard distribution of measurements on a particular instrument, and δ is an acceptable error.
Another aspect of the patent document provides a system for performing the methods described herein. In some embodiments, the system includes a computer-readable medium coupled to one or more data processing apparatus having instructions stored thereon which, when executed by the one or more data processing apparatus, cause the one or more data processing apparatus to perform a method.
Another aspect provides a method of determining an attribute of a sample. The method includes:
Various embodiments of this patent document methods and systems for instrument calibrations. The challenges in calibration arise from the high accuracy required for mass calibrations, and the fact that the measurements of masses of the calibration reference standard ions are subjects to the same deviations of instrument response as the measurements of any other ions.
The deviations of reference values may result from but not limited to the sample introduction methods and from data acquisition parameters, as for any other measured ions. In addition, errors of calculated values may also arise from the intrinsic properties of chosen mathematical function, which is used to approximate and curve fit the instrument's response and calculate the subsequent measured values.
It was occasionally observed that even after the careful calibration of a mass spectrometer, measured masses of analyte ions deviate significantly from their expected theoretical masses, so the obtained mass error is well beyond the acceptable value.
Such mass errors might originate in the initial calibration procedure and calibration method acquisition parameters using standard reference ions, and be carried out to calibration function constants and subsequently to all further calculated by that function values.
For example, it is being observed that the instrument response for the same mass of an ion measured by high-end MALDI-TOF MS instrument can fluctuate up to 10 ppm on a relatively well prepared and uniform target sample spot, and the can differ as much as 100 ppm or more on a sample spot with not so uniform matrix-sample morphology.
The typical errors of masses of different ions obtained in the same spectrum are shown in
The same kind of so-called “normal response signal fluctuations” are also likely when standard reference ions are used to establish calibration function for an instrument. Thus, if the constants of a calibration function, as for example, A, B, and C, for quadratic calibration function (1), are obtained using deviated from theoretical instrument response, this will introduce errors to all subsequently calculated by that equation masses or other values.
The calculated by calibration function higher than acceptable mass errors are also possible even if the instrument response for reference calibration ions are within the acceptable error range to their theoretical/ideal response values. It has been observed that at certain sets of positive or negative deviations of measured reference masses the generated calibration function might produce calculated mass errors of analyte ions that are well beyond the acceptable limit. It is also possible that only a certain range of the calibration function can be used for analyses, as values in outside of that range might produce ion masses well beyond the error limit. The errors produced by the calibration function might be the result of the natural behavior of a chosen mathematical function, as shown in
The approach of this patent document is designed to eliminate or minimize the effect of instrument response deviations. It is intended to establish the intrinsic master instrument response function, the major natural response of the particular instrument to the masses of measured ions. As all the measurements are subjects to random errors, the constants of the fundamental intrinsic response master calibration function are obtained by continuously adding and averaging corresponding constants of all valid calibration functions.
An aspect of the patent document provides a method of calibrating an instrument to reduce random errors in determining an attribute of one or more samples. The method generally includes:
In some embodiments, the deviation or maximum error in the attribute is based on the maximum difference calculated by the equation having the first averaged set and the equation having the second averaged set. In some embodiments, the set of samples in step (i) comprises three or more samples. In some embodiments, each calibration function comprises three or more constants.
The method may further include a step to validate the first averaged set. For instance, if the error in the calculated attribute from the first averaged set is bigger than a pre-selected value, then one, two, three or more subsets of the reference samples are selected to derive respectively one, two, three or more sub-sets of constants. These subsets allow a more focused analysis around a range closer to the target attribute. Each subset may be re-run through the instrument to collect the response signals for calculation of the corresponding constants. Alternatively, the response signals from the previous collection can be re-used for the calculation of the corresponding subset of constants. The attribute of an unknown sample falling with a respective subset of the reference samples is calculated based on the constants of the respective subset, and the respective subset substitutes the first averaged step for subsequent steps.
In some embodiments, after step (iv), if the error in the attribute calculated from the first averaged set is bigger than a pre-selected value, two subsets of the reference samples are selected to derive two sub-sets of constants. The two subsets have a partial overlap and are averaged to obtain an averaged subset, and the averaged subset substitutes the first averaged step for subsequent steps with regards to an unknown sample falling with the overlap.
The above step of using targeted subsets (continuous, non-continuous, with or without overlap) can be used independently or in combination. For instance, one can use a first subset out of three continuous subsets for determining the attribute of a sample or setting up a master calibration function equation. In a separate scenario, a subset derived from two overlapping subsets can also be used for the same purposes. Further, the two subsets in the two scenarios can be combined and averaged to obtain a new subset for the above purposes.
In some cases, if after multiple collections the error is greater than the allowed maximum error, the data or reference samples will be divided into subsets or portions as described above so that the constants or calibration equations are more tailored or narrowly adjusted to the range of the actual attribute or the attribute of the sample to be examined.
The methods disclosed herein in various steps may include examining the deviation in attributes between calculated results from a new calibration equation and calculated results from the immediate preceding calibration equation, or between calculated results from a new calibration equation and the actual values of the attributes. A pre-determined value (δ or δmax) as the maximum error or deviation is used for comparison. The value may vary depending on research requirements and the actual attributes (e.g. sizes of ions formed) and range for example from 0.001 to 1000 ppm. Nonlimiting examples of δ or δmax include about 0.01 ppm, about 0.1 ppm, about 0.5 ppm, about 1 ppm, about 2 ppm, about 3 ppm, about 4 ppm, about 5 ppm, about 6 ppm, about 8 ppm, about 10 ppm, about 20 ppm, about 30 ppm, about 50 ppm, about 80 ppm, about 100 ppm, about 200 ppm, and about 500 ppm.
A related aspect provides a method to detect an attribute of an unknown sample using the above described method. The attribute may be determined based on the first averaged set, the second averaged set or the first updated set. In some embodiments, the attribute is mass.
A further aspect provides a system comprising a computer-readable medium coupled to one or more data processing apparatus having instructions stored thereon which, when executed by the one or more data processing apparatus, cause the one or more data processing apparatus to perform the methods of calibration or detection disclosed herein. In some embodiments, the system further comprising one or more memories for storing and updating calculation results.
As for example, in case of MALDI-TOF instruments, such master calibration function, which establishes intrinsic, close to theoretical response of an instrument, and calculates the values of ion masses close to their exact masses has a form of quadratic polynomial
m
i
=A
aveτi2+Baveτi+Cave
where, Aave, Bave, and Cave, are averaged values of calibration constants from valid calibrations performed during longtime use of the instrument and calculated as
The greater the number of averaged sets of constants, the lower the error, and the closer are the masses of ions calculated by the fundamental calibration function to the exact masses. The fundamental calibration function is specific to a certain type of instrument and to particular set of method parameters.
The minimum number of averaged sets of constants depends on standard deviation of measurements of a particular instrument as well as desired confidence level, and for example, is determined as
where, z is z-value corresponding to desired confidence level, σ is standard distribution of measurements on a particular instrument, δ is an acceptable error.
In an exemplary embodiment, a method of instrument calibration includes the following:
m
s=ƒ(r)
where, z is z-value corresponding to desired confidence level, σ is standard deviation of measurements on a particular instrument, and δ is an acceptable error.
The subsequent new set or sets of constants are evaluated against the immediately preceding updated set of constants. If the deviation is within a predetermined range, the new set is averaged with the immediately preceding updated set of constants to provide a new updated set. The new updated set will be the immediately preceding updated for subsequently collected of new set or sets of constants for evaluation of deviation. The cycle of continuously updating the immediately preceding update with a reference sample prior to the examination of the unknown sample will help reduce random errors in determining an attribute of the sample. The reference sample has known attributes for collection of constants of calibration function. A reference sample can be the same or different from a subsequent reference sample used for data collection.
Various instruments might use different mathematical functions to relate an instrument response signal to an attribute of the sample. Non-limiting examples of these functions and examples of their applications include:
Other mathematical functions that are not shown above are also used as calibration functions to relate an instrument response to the sample attribute.
For the functions shown above or other functions to which instrument response is approximated, constants, such as A, B, C, D, etc., must be obtained by a curve fitting method, using standard reference compounds and the instrument detector response, which could be but not limited to an ion arrival time, frequency, ion radius path, voltage, magnetic field, and any other characteristic parameter of an ion detected or applied to an ion by the instrument.
Once the constants, such as A, B, C, D, etc., of the calibration function are obtained, the instrument is considered to be calibrated, so it is assumed that the function calculates the masses of unknown ions adequately and the masses of ions obtained by the calibration function (2) are accurate.
In an exemplary embodiment, a method for calibrating an instrument and/or determining an attribute of a sample includes one or more of the following steps:
The predetermined number “N” can be calculated according to the following equation, wherein z is z-value corresponding to desired confidence level, σ is standard deviation of measurements on a particular instrument, and δ is an acceptable error.
The standard deviation, σ, can be calculated for example as
where σ is a standard deviation, mi is the value of a measurement, mave, is the average value of N measurements. The calibration function having constants Aave, Bave, Cave, Dave, etc., is a master calibration function and will be used for further measurements.
n is the number of sets included to calculate Aave, Bave, Cave, Dave, etc.
The attribute of a sample can be determined by applying the calibration function having constants Aupdated ave, Bupdated ave, Cupdated ave, Dupdated ave, etc.
Alternatively, one or more of the above steps (e.g. (a) and (b) can be repeated to collect a plurality sets of the one or more calibration constants until a total number of the plurality sets equals or exceeds a predetermined number, as
Anew n, Bnew n, Cnew n, Dnew n, . . . .
A set of averaged corresponding new constants, Anew ave, Bnew ave, Cnew ave, Dnew ave, etc, of the plurality sets of the one or more calibration constants is obtained for determining the attribute of the sample. The deviation of the set of averaged new constants, Anew ave, Bnew ave, Cnew ave, Dnew ave, etc. can be calculated from the set of averaged constants, Aave, Bave, Cave, Dave, etc, or its immediate preceding average.
In some embodiments, the calculation of the deviation is based on the one or more constants of the reference sample. Various equations are known in the field to carry out the determination. In an exemplary embodiment, the following equation is adopted.
δ=ƒnew(r)−ƒprevious/updated(r)
ƒnew(r) is a new calibration function;
ƒprevious/updated(r) is a previous or updated master function.
In some embodiments, the method includes removing one or more sets of constants that are outside the range of a predetermined deviation threshold. Non-limiting examples of the threshold value include those illustrated above. A new average is then calculated based on the remaining sets of constants. In some embodiments, the total number of the remaining sets is equal of more than the predetermined number as defined above. In some embodiments, one or more sets of data from a selective date(s) are removed to calculate a new average, and the total number of the remaining sets is preferably equal of more than the predetermined number.
In some embodiments the range of interest is divided into multiple partial ranges described by multiple calibration functions which are obtained using described above procedure.
The following example illustrates the use of the Method for the calibration of a time of flight (TOF) mass spectrometer using quadratic calibration function. The method can also be used for calibration of other types of instruments using other than quadratic mathematical functions. The calibration can be performed by a software, which is a separate installation or a part of a software used to run the instrument.
where z is z-value corresponding to desired confidence level (for example, z=1.65, for 90% confidence level; z=1.96, for 95% confidence level; z=2.576, for 99% confidence level; z=3.291, for 99.9% confidence level); σn is the standard deviation of arrival times for the corresponding compound, n; δ is a predetermined acceptable error, for example, for publications in major research journals δ should not exceed 5 ppm, in other chemical, biochemical etc. research the acceptable error might vary from 0.001 to 100 ppm or higher, which depends on the sizes of an ions and fragments formed;
where τni is the ith arrival time of nth ion in the set of N arrival times, i=1, . . . N;
m=A
initialτ2+Binitialτ+Cinitial (ƒinitial)
which relates the arrival time of an ion, τ, to its mass, m,
For this purpose, the least square approximation method can be used as
where τi ave is the average arrival time of the ith ion, calculated in step (5); mi exact is the exact mass of the ith ion in Daltons; i=1, . . . , n, where n is the total number of reference ions;
m
1c
=A
initialτ1ave2+Binitialτ1ave+Cinitial
m
2c
=A
initialτ2ave2+Binitialτ2ave+Cinitial
. . .
m
nc
=A
initialτnave2+Binitialτnave+Cinitial
where mic is the calculated from (ƒinitial) mass of ith reference ion, i=1, . . . , n, obtained in step (7); mi exact is the exact mass of corresponding reference ion;
(a) obtain a set of three-points partial range calibration equations using sets of three closely adjacent reference compounds, as shown in
ƒ(1,2,3): m(1-3)=A(1-3)τ2+B(1-3)τ+C(1-3) (ƒ1-3) covers range from 1 to 3
ƒ(2,3,4): m(2-4)=A(2-4)τ2+B(2-4)τ+C(2-4) (ƒ2-4) covers range from 2 to 4
ƒ(3,4,5): m(3-5)=A(3-5)τ2+B(3-5)τ+C(3-5) (ƒ3-5) covers range from 3 to 5
. . . .
The masses of compounds to be analyzed should not be lower than the lowest mass reference compound and should not be higher than the highest mass reference compound within the sets of three reference compounds used to generate the partial range calibration equation. Use a partial range calibration equation, such as (ƒ1-3) or (ƒ2-4), or etc., to analyze ions having masses between the lowest and highest mass reference compounds used to generate the partial range calibration equation;
or
(b) use two adjacent tree-points partial range calibration equations found in step (11)(a) to obtain the averaged partially overlapped quadratic calibration equation, in which first partial range calibration equation is shifted relatively to the second partial range calibration equation by one reference point. As show in
The averaged overlapping calibration equation ƒ(2-3) is obtained by calculating averages of corresponding coefficients of two contributing partial calibration equations, as
Use the obtained averaged overlapping calibration equation to analyze compounds, which have masses in the overlapping range, such as between 2 and 3;
Master Calibration Process
m
master
=A
masterτ2+Bmasterτ+Cmaster (ƒmaster)
and new calibration function described by quadratic polynomial
m
new
=A
newτ2+Bnewτ+Cnew (ƒnew)
occurs at instrument response signal
and is obtained as
where ƒnew(τδmax) and ƒmaster(τδmax) are values of the new and master calibration functions calculated at point τδmax.
The proposed method of Master Calibration Function is illustrated using a MALDI-TOF (matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight) mass spectrometer using quadratic calibration function. The method can also be used for calibration of other types of instruments using other than quadratic mathematical functions. The calibration can be performed by a software, which is a separate installation or a part of a software used to run the instrument.
The typical distribution of arrival times, for example, for PEG ion of 745.419221 m/z in the collected spectra and the average ion arrival time are shown below
τ1=48535.114058; τ2=48535.216295; τ3=48535.036015; . . . ; τ25=48535.157462;
τave=48535.033141.
Such arrival times averages were obtained for all the 64 PEG ions.
For all the 64 reference ions standard deviations were calculated as
σ1=0.105301186; σ2=0.104494391; σ3=0.119723646; . . . ; σ64=0.228691161
and are shown in the Table 1:
A
initial=0.000000323857314
B
initial=0.000463123673068
C
initial=5.072697495288030
m=0.000000323857314τ2−0.000463123673068τ+5.072697495288030 (ƒinitial)
which relates the arrival time of an ion, τ, to its mass, m;
The calculated masses and mass errors of the reference ions are shown in
(a) In this case a set of three-point partial range calibration equations, using sets of three closely adjacent reference compounds, was obtained. For example, the equation ƒ(745-921) was approximated from three reference compounds 745, 833, and 921 m/z, and covers range from 745 to 921 m/z, the equation ƒ(921-1098) was approximated from three reference compounds, 921, 1010, and 1098 m/z, and covers range from 921 to 1098 m/z, the equation ƒ(1098-1274) was approximated from three reference compounds 1098, 1186, and 1274 m/z, and covers range from 1098 to 1274 m/z etc., until the three point sets reached the end of the range of interest:
ƒ(745-921): m=0.000000323006922·τ2−0.000363865876187·τ+2.188389167732910
ƒ(921-1098): m=0.000000323188280·τ2−0.000382259818932·τ+2.652918837008430
ƒ(1098-1274): m=0.000000323597917·τ2−0.000430295205487·τ+4.061106513613590
. . . (continue till the three point sets reached the end of the range of interest)
The molar masses of compounds were measured on the instrument utilizing the set of the partial range calibration functions. As shown in
(b) In addition, a set of intermediate three-point calibration functions, such as for example function ƒ(833-1010) covering range from the middle of previously obtained ƒ(745-921) to the middle of ƒ(921-1098), also was obtained:
ƒ(833-1010): m=0.000000323322644·τ2−0.000397083823838·τ+3.061584675889090
. . . .
The averaged overlapped calibration functions also were obtained. For example, the coefficients of the functions ƒ(745-921) and ƒ(833-1010) were averaged to obtain a calibration function ƒ(833-921), to be used for the range in which these two functions overlap, from 833 to 921 m/z.
The use of the averaged partially overlapped quadratic calibration functions shown further decrease in generated mass errors. For some ions the mass error was up to 30% less than already small error generated by partial range functions.
(12) For the particular instrument and method parameters used, the full range calibration function obtained in step (10) and sets of partial range calibration functions obtained in (11)(a), (11)(b) reflect the intrinsic instrument response and constitute the master calibration functions, which are stored within the instrument method parameters.
Master Calibration Process
ƒ(1)new: A(1)new=3.2336192E-07; B(1)new=−3.995561313134E-04; C(1)new=3.10022E+00;
ƒ(2)new: A(2)new=3.2336160E-07; B(2)new=−3.996561313101E-04; C(2)new=3.09250E+00;
ƒ(1)new: δ=18 ppm>5 ppm
ƒ(2)new: δ=1.5 ppm<5 ppm
The new calibration function ƒ(2)new generated the maximum mass error of 1.5 ppm, which is lower than the selected maximum value. So, function ƒ(2)new is considered to be valid, it can be used for the analysis close in time and its coefficients A(2)new, B(2)new, C(2)new, are averaged with the corresponding coefficients of the initial or previous master calibration function.
Many modifications and other examples of the disclosure set forth herein will come to mind to those skilled in the art to which this disclosure pertains, having the benefit of the teachings presented in the foregoing descriptions and the associated drawings. Therefore, it is to be understood that the disclosure is not to be limited to the specific examples disclosed and that modifications and other embodiments are intended to be included within the scope of the appended claims.
Moreover, although the foregoing descriptions and the associated embodiments describe aspects of the disclosure in the context of certain example combinations of structural elements and/or functions, it should be appreciated that different combinations of elements and/or functions may be provided by alternative embodiments without departing from the scope of the appended claims. In this regard, for example, different combinations of elements and/or functions than those explicitly described above are also contemplated as may be set forth in some of the appended claims. Although specific terms are employed herein, they are used in a generic and descriptive sense only and not for purposes of limitation.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
63139413 | Jan 2021 | US |