MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014290403 · doi:10.1039/b612604a

Preparation and application of in-fibre internal standardization solid-phase microextraction

2007· article· en· W2014290403 on OpenAlexaff
Wennan Zhao, Gangfeng Ouyang, Janusz Pawliszyn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolid-phase microextractionChromatographyExtraction (chemistry)AnalyteSample preparationStandard additionStandard solutionReproducibilityMatrix (chemical analysis)CalibrationInternal standardVolatility (finance)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceChemistryDetection limitMass spectrometryGas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The in-fibre standardization method is a novel approach that has been developed for field sampling/sample preparation, in which an internal standard is pre-loaded onto a solid-phase microextraction (SPME) fibre for calibration of the extraction of target analytes in field samples. The same method can also be used for in-vial sample analysis. In this study, different techniques to load the standard to a non-porous SPME fibre were investigated. It was found that the appropriateness of the technique depends on the physical properties of the standards that are used for the analysis. Headspace extraction of the standard dissolved in pumping oil works well for volatile compounds. Conversely, headspace extraction of the pure standard is an effective approach for semi-volatile compounds. For compounds with low volatility, a syringe-fibre transfer method and direct extraction of the standard dissolved in a solvent exhibited a good reproducibility (<5% RSD). The main advantage of the approaches investigated in this study is that the standard generation vials can be reused for hundreds of analyses without exhibiting significant loss. Moreover, most of the standard loading processes studied can be performed automatically, which is efficient and precise. Finally, the standard loading technique and in-fibre standardization method were applied to a complex matrix (milk) and the results illustrated that the matrix effect can be effectively compensated for with this approach.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207