MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004460890 · doi:10.1255/jnirs.857

Quantification of Absorber through a Scattering Medium of Different Thickness Using Evanescent Light Piping

2010· article· en· W2004460890 on OpenAlexaff
Fabiano Pandozzi, David H. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Near Infrared Spectroscopy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScatteringOpacityOpticsMaterials scienceAnalyteWavelengthLight scatteringAbsorption (acoustics)Scattering coefficientChemistryOptoelectronicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A non-invasive method has been developed for analyte quantification in fluids surrounded by optically-scattering, opaque walls. This method is based on steady state, visible wavelength reflectance measurements made simultaneously at multiple positions on the surface of a sample. Previous work has shown that reflectance measurements contain information about underlying scattering layers in layered scattering samples. We hypothesise that similar information about an absorbing layer below a scattering layer can be obtained from evanescent wave effects. Principal component analysis showed the data to be composed of three components, which were refined by a multivariate curve resolution alternating least squares (MCR-ALS) approach with non-negativity constraints. The first component is related to the scattering layer thickness, the second is associated with analyte concentration and the third is due to a minor back reflection within the sample cell. Both MCR and stagewise multi-linear regression (SMLR) approaches were taken to estimate analyte concentration and scattering layer thickness, for samples having thicknesses between 1 mm and 8 mm. Results demonstrate that a simple experimental configuration can easily predict optical properties of unknown samples. With the adoption of a multi-wavelength approach to this method, it is expected that improved absorption coefficient (μ a ) estimation accuracy can be realised in a variety of application areas such as in analysis through opaque containers, in vivo measurements and in-line monitoring of reactions.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Near Infrared SpectroscopySame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207