MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W130885013 · doi:10.2478/cttr-2013-0722

Puff-by-puff Mainstream Smoke Analysis by Multiplex Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

2001· article· en· W130885013 on OpenAlexfundno aff
CE Thomas, KB Koller

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to Tobacco & Nicotine Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsSidestream smokeMass spectrometryChemistryChromatographySmokeAnalyteElutionGas chromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)DART ion sourceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A puff-by-puff mainstream smoke procedure has been developed that provides the sensitivity and selectivity of a gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) system. The smoke analysis is based on automated sample collection and injection into the GC system. This development builds on, and complements, prior puff-by-puff procedures developed by Philip Morris USA, that utilized infrared (IR) analysis of gas-phase mainstream smoke. IR analysis of the gas-phase smoke for individual smoke constituents relies on the unique spectroscopic absorption patterns of each analyte. The new multiplex procedure relies on both chromatographic separation as well as spectroscopic separation. A significant feature of this method is that multiple injections are made prior to the complete elution of the first injected sample. The benefits of this methodology are that both sensitivity and the number of detected compounds are enhanced. While the multiplex method increases the complexity of the chromatographic data, the mass spectral analysis provides a means for data reduction to meaningful results. Many smoke constituents that are at concentrations below the Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) detection limit are observable with the multiplex analysis while maintaining the feature of puff-by-puff characterization of fresh smoke. The gas-phase mainstream smoke filtration performance of standard adsorption materials are discussed as a demonstration of the versatility and information content of this analytical procedure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContributions to Tobacco & Nicotine ResearchSame topicAnalytical Chemistry and ChromatographyFrench-language works237,207