A novel experimental approach to investigate radiolysis processes in liquid samples using collimated radiation sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here is detailed a novel and low-cost experimental method for high-throughput automated fluid sample irradiation. The sample is delivered via syringe pump to a nozzle, where it is expressed in the form of a hanging droplet into the path of a beam of ionising radiation. The dose delivery is controlled by an upstream lead shutter, which allows the beam to reach the droplet for a user defined period of time. The droplet is then further expressed after irradiation until it falls into one well of a standard microplate. The entire system is automated and can be operated remotely using software designed in-house, allowing for use in environments deemed unsafe for the user (synchrotron beamlines, for example). Depending on the number of wells in the microplate, several droplets can be irradiated before any human interaction is necessary, and the user may choose up to 10 samples per microplate using an array of identical syringe pumps, the design of which is described here. The nozzles consistently produce droplets of 25.1 ± 0.5 μl.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".