MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039744743 · doi:10.1007/s13361-010-0011-x

Do the O<sub>2</sub> Schumann–Runge Bands Participate in keV Collision-Induced Dissociation Experiments?

2011· article· en· W2039744743 on OpenAlexafffund
Yawei Lin, P. Mayer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryDissociation (chemistry)Atomic physicsIonProjectileExcited stateFragmentation (computing)CollisionCollision-induced dissociationMass spectrometrySpectral lineOxygenMass spectrumPhysicsTandem mass spectrometryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In high-energy (keV) CID experiments, oxygen has the unique ability to enhance specific ion fragmentation pathways that lie within a relatively narrow band of activation energy. It has been previously proposed that this oxygen-enhanced dissociation phenomenon is due to the participation of the O(2) B(3)Σ(u)(+) - X(3)Σ(g)(-) (Schumann-Runge) system in the collision complex. During the collision, oxygen is first excited to its [Formula: see text] state before it returns this energy to the projectile ion. This energy drives the nonstatistical dissociation of the projectile provided there is an energetically accessible pathway in resonance with the absorbed radiation. To probe the validity of this hypothesis, a modified VG-ZAB mass spectrometer was used to observe the photon emissions from keV collisions of a selection of projectile ions with O(2) target gas. By studying the resulting collision-induced emission (CIE) spectra, a second potential mechanism came to light, one that involves the near-isoenergetic O(2) (+.) A (2)Π(u)→X (2) Π(g) state transition.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society for Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207