MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023215552 · doi:10.1002/mas.20223

Structures, energetics, and dynamics of gas phase ions studied by FTICR and HPMS

2009· article· en· W2023215552 on OpenAlexafffund
Ronghu Wu, Terry B. McMahon

Bibliographic record

VenueMass Spectrometry Reviews · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryFourier transform ion cyclotron resonanceInfrared multiphoton dissociationMass spectrometryIon cyclotron resonanceDissociation (chemistry)AffinitiesAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Proton affinityIonMass spectrumPhysical chemistryProtonationCyclotronStereochemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTICR-MS) and high-pressure mass spectrometry (HPMS) are very powerful tools in the field of gas phase ion chemistry. Many experimental method developments based on FTICR-MS and HPMS are summarized, including the coupling of a high-pressure external ion source to a FTICR mass spectrometer, blackbody infrared radiative dissociation (BIRD), coupling laser desorption ionization with HPMS, infrared multiple photon dissociation (IRMPD), radiative association and bimolecular routes to gas phase cluster ion formation. An abundance of thermochemical data, such as proton affinities, gas phase acidities, methyl cation affinities and metal cation affinities, have been obtained. Some of these data are the basis of the standard data listed in the NIST thermochemical databases. Ion-molecule interactions, energetics, reactivities, and structures of molecules have been extensively investigated using the methods developed based on HPMS and FTICR mass spectrometric techniques.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations39
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMass Spectrometry ReviewsSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207