MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065514707 · doi:10.1063/1.1427668

High intensity ion beams from an atmospheric pressure inductively coupled plasma

2002· article· en· W2065514707 on OpenAlexaff
S. Al Moussalami, W. Chen, B. A. Collings, D. J. Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceInductively coupled plasmaInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryAtmospheric pressureIonMass spectrometryQuadrupole mass analyzerExtraction (chemistry)PlasmaAtmospheric-pressure plasmaAnalytical Chemistry (journal)AnalyteIon beamQuadrupoleIntensity (physics)Ion currentAtomic physicsChemistryOpticsChromatographyPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work is directed towards substantially improving the sensitivity of an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS). Ions produced in the ICP at atmospheric pressure have been extracted with comparatively high current densities. The conventional approach to ion extraction, based on a skimmed molecular beam, has been abandoned, and a high extraction field arrangement has been adopted. Although the new approach is not optimized, current densities more than 180 times greater than that of a conventional interface have been extracted and analyte sensitivities ∼10–100× greater than those reported previously for quadrupole ICP-MS have been measured.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207