MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001266804 · doi:10.1002/rcm.221

Ion fragmentation in an electrospray ionization mass spectrometer interface with different gases

2001· article· en· W2001266804 on OpenAlexafffund
Bradley B. Schneider, D. J. Douglas, David D. Y. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFragmentation (computing)ChemistryKryptonArgonMass spectrometryIonBody orificeIonizationCondensationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Ion sourceChromatographyThermodynamicsPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrogen, argon, and krypton are used as curtain gases in an electrospray ionization mass spectrometer in an attempt to study the effect of these gases on the extent of ion fragmentation between the orifice and the skimmer of the interface region. A previously published collision model predicts that the degree of ion fragmentation increases with increasing mass of the curtain gas. However, the fragmentation yields are found to be the opposite to that expected. It is believed that the reversed trend with argon and krypton is caused by condensation of the gases within the free jet expansion between the orifice and the skimmer. A condensation parameter can be used to predict the degree of clustering of gases within a free jet expansion. When the condensation parameter is minimized, the predicted trend of fragmentation with mass is observed.

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)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations29
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Communications in Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207