MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991404492 · doi:10.1021/ac203006j

Determination of the Atomic Weight of <sup>28</sup>Si-Enriched Silicon for a Revised Estimate of the Avogadro Constant

2012· article· en· W1991404492 on OpenAlexaff
Lu Yang, Zoltán Mester, Ralph E. Sturgeon, Juris Meija

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvogadro constantAtomic massChemistrySiliconAnalytical Chemistry (journal)KilogramAtomic physicsPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The much anticipated overhaul of the International System of Units (SI) will result in new definitions of base units in terms of fundamental constants. However, redefinition of the kilogram in terms of the Planck constant (h) cannot proceed without consistency between the Avogadro and Planck constants, which are both related through the Rydberg constant. In this work, an independent assessment of the atomic weight of silicon in a highly enriched (28)Si crystal supplied by the International Avogadro Coordination (IAC) was performed. This recent analytical approach, based on dissolution with NaOH and its isotopic characterization by multicollector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, is critically evaluated. The resultant atomic weight A(r)(Si) = 27.976 968 39(24)(k=1) differs significantly from the most recent value of A(r)(Si) = 27.976 970 27(23)(k=1). Using the results generated herein for A(r)(Si) along with other IAC measurement results for mass, volume, and the lattice spacing, the estimate of the Avogadro constant becomes N(A) = 6.022 140 40(19) × 10(23) mol(-1).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations48
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationFrench-language works237,207