Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 52, Issue 1, pp 569–580 | Cite as

Methodology to classify the shape of reinforcement fillers: optimization, evaluation, comparison, and selection of models

  • Roberto Fernandez Martinez
  • Maider Iturrondobeitia
  • Julen Ibarretxe
  • Teresa Guraya
Original Paper


This work applies statistical analysis, and classical and advanced machine learning algorithms to classify 7714 aggregates into four categories according to their shape. The aggregates under study are obtained from several grades of carbon black: Vulcan XC 605, Vulcan XC 72, CSX 691, Printex 25, N990, and N762. The classification of the shape is of great significance in order to explain and predict the end-use properties of the composite materials, like mechanical properties. The proposed approach combines transmission electron microscopy and automated image analysis to obtain the dataset of the morphological features that defines the shape of the aggregate, and statistical analysis and machine learning techniques to create the classification models using feature transformation and reduction, parameter tuning, and validation methods in order to achieve robust classification models. The best result is obtained from a classification tree based on evolutionary algorithms with a principal component analysis-based feature reduction that reports an acceptable accuracy, thereby validating both the final chosen model and the methodology.


Carbon Black Classification Tree Validation Dataset Feature Reduction Testing Stage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors would like to thank the Basque Government for financial support through the UEGV09/C19 and S-PE11UN047 projects and the Biscay Regional Government for financial support through the DFV 6-12-TK-2010-25 and DFV 6-12-TK-2012-12 Projects. In addition, we would also like to acknowledge Ana Martinez-Amesti from SGIker (UPV/EHU) for TEM measurements and the help of Dr. Fernando Tusell and his group for their encouragement and scientific assistance in statistics.


  1. 1.
    Leblanc JL (2010) Filled polymers: science and industrial applications. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Long CM, Nascarella MA, Valberg PA (2013) Carbon black versus black carbon and other airborne materials containing elemental carbon: physical and chemical distinctions. Environ Pollut 181:271–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Medalia AI (1970) Morphology of aggregates: VI. Effective volume of aggregates of carbon black from electron microscopy; Application to vehicle absorption and to die swell of filled rubber. J Colloid Interface Sci 32(1):115–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hess WM, Ban LL, McDonald GC (1969) Carbon black morphology: I. Particle microstructure. II. Automated EM analysis of aggregate size and shape. Rubber Chem Technol 42(4):1209–1234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hess WM, McDonald GC, Urban E (1973) Specific shape characterization of carbon black primary units. Rubber Chem Technol 46(1):204–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Herd CR, McDonald GC, Hess WM (1992) Morphology of carbon-black aggregates: fractal versus euclidean geometry. Rubber Chem Technol 65(1):107–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Herd CR, McDonald GC, Smith RE, Hess WM (1993) The use of skeletonization for the shape classification of carbon-black aggregates. Rubber Chem Technol 66(4):491–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maas S, Gronski W (1999) Characterization of carbon blacks by transmission electron microscopy and advanced image analysis, Kautsch. Gummi Kunstst 52:26–31Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luengo L, Laurent H, Treuillet S, Jolivet I, Gomez E (2013) Unsupervised segmentation for transmission imaging of carbon black. Lect Notes Comput Sci 8192:516–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lopez-de-Uralde J, Ruiz I, Santos I, Zubillaga A, Bringas PG, Okariz A, Guraya T (2010) Automatic morphological categorisation of carbon black nano-aggregates. Lect Notes Comput Sci 6262:185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morozov IA, Lauke B, Heinrich G (2012) Microstructural analysis of carbon black filled rubbers by atomic force microscopy and computer simulation techniques. Plast Rubber Compos 41(7):285–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fernandez Martinez R, Okariz A, Ibarretxe J, Iturrondobeitia M, Guraya T (2014) Use of decision tree models based on evolutionary algorithms for the morphological classification of reinforcing nano-particle aggregates. Comput Mater Sci 92:102–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xu H, Dikin DA, Burkhart C, Chen W (2014) Descriptor-based methodology for statistical characterization and 3D reconstruction of microstructural materials. Comput Mater Sci 85:206–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bishop C (2006) Pattern recognition and machine learning. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gajewski J, Sadowski T (2014) Sensitivity analysis of crack propagation in pavement bituminous layered structures using a hybrid system integrating artificial neural networks and finite element method. Comput Mater Sci 82:114–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Akbarpour H, Mohajeri M, Moradi M (2013) Investigation on the synthesis conditions at the interpore distance of nanoporous anodic aluminum oxide: a comparison of experimental study, artificial neural network, and multiple linear regression. Comput Mater Sci 79:75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fernandez Martinez R, Lostado Lorza R, Fernandez Ceniceros J, Martinez-de-Pison Ascacibar FJ (2012) Comparative analysis of learning and meta-learning algorithms for creating models for predicting the probable alcohol level during the ripening of grape berries. Comput Electron Agric 80:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    ASTM Standard D3849-07 (2011) Standard test method for carbon black—morphological characterization of carbon black using electron microscopy. ASTM International, West Conshohocken. doi: 10.1520/D3849-07R11,
  19. 19.
    McLachlan GJ (2014) Discriminant analysis and statistical pattern recognition. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huberty CJ (1994) Applied discriminant analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liland KH, Indahl UG (2009) Powered partial least squares discriminant analysis. J Chemom 23:7–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Indahl U (2005) A twist to partial least squares regression. J Chemom 19:32–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tibshirani R, Hastie T, Narasimhan B, Chu G (2003) Class Prediction by nearest shrunken centroids, with applications to DNA microarrays. Stat Sci 18(1):104–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tibshirani R, Hastie T, Narasimhan B, Chu G (2002) Diagnosis of multiple cancer types by shrunken centroids of gene expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99(10):6567–6572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hastie T, Tibshirani R (1996) Discriminant Analysis by Gaussian Mixtures. J Roy Stat Soc B 58:155–176Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) Chapter 12: support vector machines and flexible discriminants. In: Elements of statistical learning—data mining, inference and prediction, 2nd edn, Springer, New York, p 417–458Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Buja A (1994) Flexible discriminant analysis by optimal scoring. JASA 89:1255–1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ripley BD (1996) Pattern recognition and neural networks. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Karatzoglou A, Meyer D, Hornik K (2006) Support vector machines in R. J Stat Softw 15(9):1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Platt J (1998) Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal optimization. In: Scholkopf B, Burges C, Smola A (eds) Advances in kernel methods—support vector learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 185–208Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vapnik V (1998) Statistical learning theory. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth, Chapman & Hall/CRCGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kuhn M, Johnson K (2013) Applied predictive modeling. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Quinlan R (1993) C4.5: programs for Machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Breiman L (1996) Bagging predictors. Mach Learn 24(2):123–140Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Grubinger T, Zeileis A, Pfeiffer KP (2011) evtree: evolutionary learning of globally optimal classification and regression Trees in R. Research platform empirical and experimental economics, Universitt InnsbruckGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Development Core Team R (2011) R: Language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. ISBN 3-900051-07-0Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.eMERG, College of Engineering of BilbaoUniversity of the Basque Country UPV/EHUBilbaoSpain

Personalised recommendations