MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042345573 · doi:10.1154/1.3193683

New statistical calibration approach for Bruker AXS D8 Discover microdiffractometer with Hi-Star detector using <scp>GADDS</scp> software

2009· article· en· W2042345573 on OpenAlexaff
Ralph Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenuePowder Diffraction · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorCalibrationPosition (finance)Computer scienceDiffractionSoftwareStar (game theory)AlgorithmPhysicsOpticsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An additional statistical calibration for the Bruker D8 Discover microdiffractometer is necessary to obtain accurate reproducible 2 θ data for cell-refinement work. This new approach uses a graphical mapping method of the 2 θ error versus the location of a selected diffraction peak on the detector surface to describe the separate roles of different calibration procedures (rebiasing, flood field, and spatial corrections) and parameters (sample-to-detector distance, x - y center coordinate) in minimizing the error. Optimized parameters are used to obtain the lowest achievable Δ 2 θ with this setup. Intensity error relative to the position of the diffracted line on the detector was found to be consistent at up to 20% and could not be reduced using any of the investigated techniques and parameters.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.019

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePowder DiffractionSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207