MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042756435 · doi:10.1080/02757540008037674

Solid-Phase Microextraction As A Tool for Studying Volatile Compounds in Frog Skin

2000· article· en· W2042756435 on OpenAlex
Benjamin Smith, Cláudia Alcaraz Zini, Janusz Pawliszyn, Michael J. Tyler, Yoji Hayasaka, Brian Williams, Elina Bastos Caramão

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry and Ecology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolid-phase microextractionTree frogPolydimethylsiloxaneChromatographySampling (signal processing)DivinylbenzeneChemistryBiologyGas chromatography–mass spectrometryZoologyMass spectrometryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) is an effective technique for studying frog volatile secretions. Its primary advantage is in its application to sampling live animals. the ability to sample an organism over an extended period allows changes in an individual's chemical signature to be determined. the presence of eucalyptol in the skin secretion of Ewing's tree frog, Litoria ewingi, was used to assess the effectiveness of SPME in sampling frog volatiles. Rapid sample times coupled with the polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene (PDMS/DVB) fibre provided the best signal/noise ratio for the majority of frog volatiles analysed, and importantly resulted in the least amount of stress to the animals involved.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.276 · 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