MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053343067 · doi:10.1021/jf025577+

Sampling and Monitoring of Biogenic Emissions by Eucalyptus Leaves Using Membrane Extraction with Sorbent Interface (MESI)

2002· article· en· W2053343067 on OpenAlexafffund
Limei Wang, Heather Lord, Rick Morehead, Frank L. Dorman, Janusz Pawliszyn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersMinistère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation - Québec
KeywordsTenaxSorbentExtraction (chemistry)MembraneEucalyptusPolydimethylsiloxaneChromatographyChemistryGas chromatographyEnvironmental scienceAdsorptionBotanyOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Membrane extraction with sorbent interface (MESI) has been applied to monitor plant fragrance volatiles emitted into indoor air. The main components of the MESI system are a membrane module and a trap, which can be connected directly to a GC or GC-MS for simultaneous multicomponent extraction and monitoring. A polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) membrane and two different traps, PDMS and Tenax, as well as a DC current supply for trap desorption have been applied in this research. After the membrane module is placed in contact with the plant, the MESI/GC-MS provides semicontinuous characterization of volatile compounds emitted. The MESI device has been applied to monitor the biogenic volatile organic compounds released during the first 8 h after a branch was cut from a Eucalyptus dunnii tree. The study demonstrates that the MESI system is a simple and useful tool for monitoring changes in emission processes as a function of time.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations24
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207