MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988308592 · doi:10.1097/ss.0b013e3181a4bf81

Prediction of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Carbon Fractions in Decomposing Forest Litter Using Diffuse Reflectance Infrared Fourier Transform Spectroscopy and Partial Least Squares Regression

2009· article· en· W1988308592 on OpenAlexaffabout
Caroline M. Preston, J. A. Trofymow

Bibliographic record

VenueSoil Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack sprucePartial least squares regressionChemistrySpectroscopyMagic angle spinningAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Diffuse reflectance infrared fourier transformTaigaNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyEcologyMathematicsEnvironmental chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A diffuse reflectance infrared Fourier transform (DRIFT) spectroscopy method was developed to enable DRIFT to be used as a substitute for 13C-nuclear magnetic resonance (13C-NMR) spectroscopy in predicting specific functional groups containing carbon. As part of the Canadian Intersite Decomposition Study, samples of 10 foliar litter types (trembling aspen, American beech, bracken fern, black spruce, Douglas-fir, plains rough fescue, jack pine, tamarack, white birch, western redcedar) and one wood type (western hemlock) at one site and a subset of three foliar litters (trembling aspen, black spruce, plains rough fescue) at three other colder sites undergoing field exposure for 12 years were annually collected. The DRIFT spectra were collected for all samples, with a subset of litter samples also analyzed by 13C-NMR spectroscopy with cross-polarization and magic-angle spinning. Partial least squares calibrations were calculated from the DRIFT spectra for the seven NMR regions representing specific carbon-containing functional groups. These calibrations were then used to predict the proportion of each NMR region in each sample. A single nondestructive sampling using as little as 0.5 g of sample gave measurements for all of the NMR regions. The DRIFT was demonstrated as a fast and simple analysis method for analyzing large numbers of samples to give fair estimates of the NMR regions for each litter type at all four sites.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoil ScienceSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207