MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062235823 · doi:10.1080/10520290701207364

Revised procedures for the certification of carmine (C.I. 75470, Natural red 4) as a biological stain

2007· article· en· W2062235823 on OpenAlex

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

VenueBiotechnic & Histochemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicDye analysis and toxicity
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigo carmineChemistryAbsorbanceChromatographyNuclear chemistryStainNatural dyeStainingOrganic chemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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