Interlaboratory study of a NACE method for the determination of <b><i>R</i></b>‐timolol content in <b><i>S</i></b>‐timolol maleate: Assessment of uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses of statistical variance were applied to evaluate the precision and practicality of a CD-based NACE assay for R-timolol after enantiomeric separation of R- and S-timolol. Data were collected in an interlaboratory study by 11 participating laboratories located in Europe and North America. General qualitative method performance was examined using suitability descriptors (i.e. resolution, selectivity, migration times and S/N), while precision was determined by quantification of variances in the determination of R-timolol at four different impurity levels in S-timolol maleate samples. The interlaboratory trials were designed in accordance with the ISO guideline 5725-2. This allowed estimating for each sample, the different variances, i.e. between-laboratory (s2(Laboratories)), between-day (s2(Days)) and between-replicate (s2(Replicates)). The variances of repeatability (s2r) and reproducibility (s2R) were then calculated. The estimated uncertainty, derived from the precision estimates, seems to be concentration-dependent above a given threshold. This example of R-timolol illustrates how a laboratory can evaluate uncertainty in general.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".