MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979477438 · doi:10.1016/s1044-0305(00)00166-5

Evaluation of alkali metal binding selectivities of caged aza-crown ether ligands by microelectrospray ionization/quadrupole ion trap mass spectrometry

2000· article· en· W1979477438 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sheryl M. Blair, Jennifer S. Brodbelt, Alan P. Marchand, Hyun‐Soon Chong, Sulejman Alihodžić

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation - QuébecWelch Foundation
KeywordsChemistryAlkali metalMass spectrometryCrown etherQuadrupole ion trapFast atom bombardmentExtraction (chemistry)Inorganic chemistryMetalChloroformMethanolIon trapIonChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microelectrospray ionization mass spectrometry (MESI-MS) is used to evaluate alkali metal binding selectivities of a variety of macrocyclic compounds. Well-studied crown ethers are used to validate the MESI-MS method. A quantitative correlation between MESI mass spectral ion intensities and solution equilibrium distributions of complexes is obtained for the mixtures containing a single host and different alkali metal guest ions. The MESI-MS method is successfully applied for the determination of the alkali metal binding selectivities of a series of cage-functionalized aza-crown ethers and relevant model compounds in methanol and chloroform solutions. The binding selectivities parallel previous results obtained using conventional spectrophotometric extraction methods. Structural differences in the host compounds, such as the presence of a cage functionality, binding cavity size, and overall flexibility, cause significant changes in the binding selectivities.

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 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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations35
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society for Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207