Bibliographic record
Abstract
A classification of dyes and other colorants is proposed, based on the chemical features responsible for their visibility and generally consonant with the writings of modern color chemists. The scheme differs in several respects from that of the Colour Index (CI), but it retains some traditional small groups of dyes that include biological stains. Natural dyes, recognized as a group in the CI, are placed with or near synthetic dyes with identical or similar chromophores. The new scheme also provides categories for dyes and fluorochromes that do not have places in the CI classification. Some CI categories, including lactones, aminoketones and hydroxyketones, are not recognized in this new scheme, which is adopted in the forthcoming 10th edition of Conn's Biological Stains: a Handbook of Dyes and Fluorochromes for Use in Biology and Medicine. Some rules are also set out for the spelling of trivial names, which has long been inconsistent in scientific literature. The ending '-ine' is used for compounds derived from organic bases (e.g., fuchsine and thionine, not fuchsin or thionin), and names ending in '-in' are for compounds that are not bases or their derivatives (e.g., eosin and phloxin, not eosine or phloxine). Initial capital letters are used only for words that are names of people or places (e.g., Nile blue or Congo red) and for the 'generic' components of CI application names (as in Acid yellow 36). Other words, including trade names that have fallen into common usage are not capitalized (e.g., alcian blue, biebrich scarlet, coomassie blue). The recommended spellings of some dyes differ from those commonly seen in vendors' catalogs and in biological publications, but they are generally consistent with English and American dictionaries, with recent writings in English by color chemists, and with the trivial names of other organic compounds.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.016 |
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".