MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1623231916 · doi:10.1002/9780470027318.a6018

Time‐of‐Flight Mass Spectrometry

2000· other· en· W1623231916 on OpenAlex
Scot R. Weinberger, Stephen C. Davis, Alexander Makarov, Steve Thompson, Randy W. Purves, Randy M. Whittal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry · 2000
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMass spectrometryDesorptionChemistryTime-of-flight mass spectrometryChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionizationTime of flightLaserInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryIonTandem mass spectrometryProtein mass spectrometryIonizationOpticsPhysicsAdsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article reviews the developmental history, fundamental technology, and general applications of time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry (TOFMS). The fundamentals of instrument operation and components are discussed. Applications in terms of gas chromatography (GC), liquid chromatography (LC), capillary electrophoresis (CE), laser desorption, multiphoton desorption, plasma desorption (PD), matrix‐assisted laser desorption, surface‐enhanced laser desorption, inductively coupled plasma (ICP), and secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) are presented. A review of tandem time‐of‐flight (TOF) techniques with a focus on ion trap TOF instrumentation is provided. The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with a fundamental understanding of TOFMS principles and applications. Information is presented in a simple, straightforward, didactic fashion.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4270.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.231 · 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