MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007742542 · doi:10.1002/jssc.201100095

Determination of free cyanide and zinc cyanide complex by capillary electrophoresis

2011· article· en· W2007742542 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCassava research and cyanide
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalPavemetrics Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyanideChemistryGold cyanidationCapillary electrophoresisZincTitrationElectrolyteChromatographyBromideElectrophoresisPotentiometric titrationInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A capillary electrophoretic (CE) protocol was developed for the separation and quantification of free cyanide and zinc cyanide complex, two key species in gold cyanidation of zinc-bearing sulfidic ores. Several common carrier electrolytes were implemented in an indirect UV detection method. The effect of electric field strength, injection volume, concentration of electro-osmotic flow (EOF) modifier and UV-absorbing agent in background electrolyte (BGE) was examined while peak height, peak area and noise were considered for optimization. The best results were obtained using a BGE that contained 35 mM sodium chromate, 12 mM free cyanide and 0.45 mM hexamethonium bromide at pH 10.5. Free cyanide concentration was compared to that measured with the conventional silver nitrate titration method in solutions containing free cyanides and weak cyano-complexes. The developed CE protocol proved very robust in capturing the concentration of free cyanides (4% error) unlike the titration method which exhibited substantial sensitivity to the interfering weak cyano-complexes (38% error).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.242 · 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