MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024072498 · doi:10.1002/rcm.390

Gas‐phase conformers of the [M + 2H] <sup>2+</sup> ion of bradykinin investigated by combining high‐field asymmetric waveform ion mobility spectrometry, hydrogen/deuterium exchange, and energy‐loss measurements

2001· article· en· W2024072498 on OpenAlexaff
Randy W. Purves, David A. Barnett, Barbara Ells, Roger Guevremont

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryConformational isomerismIon-mobility spectrometryIonDeuteriumMass spectrometryHydrogen–deuterium exchangeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)HydrogenGas phaseChromatographyPhysical chemistryAtomic physicsOrganic chemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continuous separation capability of high-field asymmetric waveform ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS) was used in combination with complementary techniques for probing biomolecular ions in the gas phase. Gas-phase conformers of the [M + 2H](2+) ion of bradykinin were examined using a combination of FAIMS, H/D exchange, and energy-loss measurements. When FAIMS data and H/D exchange data were analyzed separately, the presence of only two conformers of the [M + 2H](2+) ion of bradykinin could be detected. However, in an experiment in which FAIMS and H/D exchange were combined, at least four different conformers of the gas-phase [M + 2H](2+) ion of bradykinin were detected, including one of very low abundance. Cross sections calculated for the four conformers, based on energy-loss measurements, were 250, 240, 250, and 244 A(2), in order of decreasing abundance.

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)0.000
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations52
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Communications in Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207