MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001049580 · doi:10.1117/12.809112

High-performance dispersive Raman and absorption spectroscopy as tools for drug identification

2009· article· en· W2001049580 on OpenAlexaff
Olga Pawluczyk, Sam Andrey, Paul Nogas, Andrew K. Roy, Romuald Pawluczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsP&P Optica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaman spectroscopySpectrometerMaterials scienceAbsorption (acoustics)OpticsSpectroscopySpectral resolutionAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OptoelectronicsChemistrySpectral linePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to increasing availability of pharmaceuticals from many sources, a need is growing to quickly and efficiently analyze substances in terms of the consistency and accuracy of their chemical composition. Differences in chemical composition occur at very low concentrations, so that highly sensitive analytical methods become crucial. Recent progress in dispersive spectroscopy with the use of 2-dimensional detector arrays, permits for signal integration along a long (up to 12 mm long) entrance slit of a spectrometer, thereby increasing signal to noise ratio and improving the ability to detect small concentration changes. This is achieved with a non-scanning, non-destructive system. Two different methods using P&P Optica high performance spectrometers were used. High performance optical dispersion Raman and high performance optical absorption spectroscopy were employed to differentiate various acetaminophen-containing drugs, such as Tylenol™ and other generic brands, which differ in their ingredients. A 785 nm excitation wavelength was used in Raman measurements and strong Raman signals were observed in the spectral range 300-1800 cm-1. Measurements with the absorption spectrometer were performed in the wavelength range 620-1020 nm. Both Raman and absorption techniques used transmission light spectrometers with volume phase holographic gratings and provided sufficient spectral differences, often structural, allowing for drug differentiation.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207