MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020580780 · doi:10.1080/19440049.2011.645218

Rapid sample preparation procedure for As speciation in food samples by LC-ICP-MS

2012· article· en· W2020580780 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Bruno Lemos Batista, Letícia Ramos Nacano, Samuel Simião de Souza, Fernando Barbosa

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Additives & Contaminants Part A · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicArsenic contamination and mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCertified reference materialsChromatographyGenetic algorithmSonicationFish <Actinopterygii>ChemistrySample preparationInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryDetection limitEnvironmental chemistryMass spectrometryBiologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a rapid method for arsenic (As) speciation by LC-ICP-MS in several types of food samples. Prior to analysis, samples were milled and the As species extracted from biological tissues by sonication in only 2 min with a solution containing MeOH (10%, v/v) plus HNO₃ (2%, v/v). As species were separated by LC using an anion exchange column. Method detection limits for AsB, As³⁺, DMA, MMA and As⁵⁺ were 1.3, 0.9, 0.6, 0.7 and 0.8 ng g⁻¹, respectively. Method accuracy and precision were traceable to Certified Reference Materials SRM1577 bovine liver from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, CE278 mussel tissue from the Institute of Reference Materials and Measurements and DOLT-3 dogfish liver tissue and DORM-3 fish protein from the National Research Council of Canada. Finally, the method was applied to speciate As in food samples (egg, fish muscle, beef and chicken) purchased in Brazilian markets.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.008

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood Additives & Contaminants Part ASame topicArsenic contamination and mitigationFrench-language works237,207