MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041551012 · doi:10.1002/jssc.200301725

Dynamic solid phase microextraction for sampling of airborne sarin with gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry for rapid field detection and quantification

2004· article· en· W2041551012 on OpenAlexaff
Gary L. Hook, Carmela Jackson Lepage, Stephen I. Miller, Philip A. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolid-phase microextractionChromatographyMass spectrometryAnalyteGas chromatographySarinSampling (signal processing)ChemistryGas chromatography–mass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Sample preparationVolatile organic compoundComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A portable dynamic air sampler and solid phase microextraction were used to simultaneously detect, identify, and quantify airborne sarin with immediate analysis of samples using a field portable gas chromatography-mass spectrometry system. A mathematical model was used with knowledge of the mass of sarin trapped, linear air velocity past the exposed sampling fiber, and sample duration allowing calculation of concentration estimates. For organizations with suitable field portable instrumentation, these methods are potentially useful for rapid onsite detection and quantification of high concern analytes, either through direct environmental sampling or through sampling of air collected in bags.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.362 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Separation ScienceSame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207