Interlaboratory comparison of geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol in municipal tap water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An interlaboratory comparison ("round-robin") for geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol (MIB) was carried out between six laboratories of the Ontario Water Works Research Consortium (OWWRC). Municipal tap water was found to be a suitable medium for distribution of samples. To test stability, geosmin and MIB were added to tap water and stored at 2-4 degrees C. Under these conditions, geosmin concentrations declined by approximately 5% per month for the first 2 months. MIB concentrations were stable over a 158-day period. Three round-robins were carried out individually in 2001, 2003 and 2004. Two levels of geosmin and MIB were used: nominally 10 and 100 ng/l. In 2003 the relative standard deviation for all six participating laboratories were 34, 21, 21 and 22% for low and high level MIB, and low and high level geosmin, respectively. For all but MIB at the low level, there was a marked improvement in agreement between laboratories from 2001 to 2004. However, we recommend use of common analytical standards in order to potentially further reduce interlaboratory variability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".