MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055249762 · doi:10.1080/03067310412331330767

Flow injection determination of copper and iron in seafoods by a continuous ultrasound-assisted extraction system coupled to FAAS

2005· article· en· W2055249762 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maria del Carmen Yebra, A. Moreno‐Cid, S. Cancela

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental & Analytical Chemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsCopperChemistryExtraction (chemistry)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Atomic absorption spectroscopyChromatographyMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copper and iron were extracted on-line from solid seafood samples by a robust, fast and simple continuous ultrasound-assisted extraction system (CUES). CUES is connected to a flow-injection manifold, which allows on-line flame atomic absorption spectrometric determination of copper and iron. Experimental designs were used to optimize the continuous leaching procedures. These methods allowed a total sampling frequency of 46 and 18 samples per hour, with relative standard deviations of 1.6% and 0.3%, for copper and iron, respectively (for a sample containing 13.6 µg/g of copper and 217.3 µg/g of iron (dry mass)). The limits of detection for 30 mg of sample were 0.3 µg/g for copper and 0.6 µg/g for iron (dry mass). Analytical procedures were verified by the analysis of a standard reference material (lobster hepatopancreas marine, TORT-1) and were applied to several real seafood samples from the estuaries of Galicia (Spain) with satisfactory results.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental & Analytical ChemistrySame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207