MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008563749 · doi:10.1021/ac048113e

Archiving and Absolute Quantitation of Solutes Separated by Single Charged Droplet Coulomb Explosion

2005· article· en· W2008563749 on OpenAlexafffund
Samuel F. Bakhoum, Michael J. Bogan, George R. Agnes

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryCoulomb explosionAbsolute (philosophy)ChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Organic chemistryIonIonization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrospray (ES) ion source relies on the transfer of low-volatility solutes to the gas phase as an outcome of coulomb explosion events of charged droplets generated by electrical atomization. Introduced here are two methods for archiving compounds separated by coulomb explosion of single droplets having net charge that had been levitated in an electrodynamic balance. We categorized compounds separated by the explosion as either material ejected, including progeny droplets, or the material retained in the main residue. The potential for this methodology is illustrated by (i) qualitative characterization of solute states, aqueous versus precipitated in the separated material, and (ii) absolute quantitation of solutes separated by such an event. For a droplet containing 5 x 10(7) 20-nm-diameter fluospheres, its first encountered coulomb explosion event resulted in the ejection of 1.70% of them. The capability to acquire such detailed information regarding the individual steps in the process of transferring low-volatility solutes to the gas phase in an ES ion source is essential to develop strategies for absolute quantitation in applications of ES mass spectrometry.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207