MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020820016 · doi:10.1021/ed500062w

Hands-On Electrospray Ionization-Mass Spectrometry for Upper-Level Undergraduate and Graduate Students

2014· article· en· W2020820016 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersTrent University
KeywordsMass spectrometryElectrospray ionizationInstrumentation (computer programming)Triple quadrupole mass spectrometerGraduate studentsChemistryQuadrupole time of flightSelected reaction monitoringElectrosprayAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Quadrupole ion trapIon trapChromatographyTandem mass spectrometryComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry (ESI-MS) is a powerful technique for the detection, identification, and quantification of organic compounds. As mass spectrometers have become more user-friendly and affordable, many students—often with little experience in mass spectrometry—find themselves needing to incorporate mass spectrometry into their research. Herein, a hands-on laboratory experiment for upper-level undergraduate and graduate students to investigate ESI-MS is described. This experiment provides students with the opportunity to observe and use instrumentation discussed in class, to investigate various modes of operation, to compare triple-stage quadrupole (TSQ) with quadrupole linear ion trap (QLIT) instrumentation, and to decide upon the optimum approach for incorporation of mass spectrometry into their research.

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)0.000
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.295 · 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