Revised procedures for the certification of carmine (C.I. 75470, Natural red 4) as a biological stain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carmine is one of the original dyes certified by the Biological Stain Commission (BSC). Until now it has lacked both an assay procedure for dye content and a means to positively identify the dye. The methods for testing carmine in the laboratory of the BSC have been revised to include spectrophotometric examination at pH 12.5-12.6 to determine that the dye is carmine (lambda(max)=530-335 nm). The maximum absorbance of a solution containing 100 mg of dye per liter of water, adjusted to pH 12.5-12.6, which provides a relative measure of dye content, should lie in the range 1.2 to 1.8. If the dye is not carmine, spectrophotometry at pH 1.9-2.1 shows whether it is carminic acid (lambda(max)=490-500 nm) or 4-aminocarminic acid (lambda(max)=525-530 nm). The latter two dyes, which are also called carmine when sold as food colorants, have physical properties different from those of true carmine. The functional tests for carmine as a biological stain are Orth's lithium-carmine method for nuclei, Southgate's mucicarmine method for mucus, and Best's carmine method for glycogen.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.043 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".