MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065548555 · doi:10.1002/mas.20257

Environmental analysis by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

2009· review· en· W2065548555 on OpenAlexafffund
Diane Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueMass Spectrometry Reviews · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryMass spectrometryEnvironmental analysisAnalyteInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometrySample preparationDetection limitCertified reference materialsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Inductively coupled plasmaMatrix (chemical analysis)CalibrationSample (material)Environmental chemistryChromatographyPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews the numerous ways in which inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry has been used for the analysis of environmental samples since it was commercially introduced in 1983. Its multielemental isotopic capability, high sensitivity and wide linear dynamic range makes it ideally suited for environmental analysis. Provided that some care is taken during sample preparation and that appropriate calibration strategies are used to circumvent non-spectroscopic interferences, the technique is readily applicable to the analysis of a wide variety of environmental samples (natural waters, soils, rocks, sediments, vegetation, etc.), using quadrupole, time-of-flight or double-focusing sector-field mass spectrometers. In cases where spectroscopic interferences arising from the sample matrix cannot be resolved, then separation methods can be implemented either on- or off-line, which can simultaneously allow analyte preconcentration, thus further decreasing the already low detection limits that are achievable. In most cases, the blank, prepared by following the same steps as for the sample but without the sample, limits the ultimate detection limits that can be reached.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.006

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations50
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMass Spectrometry ReviewsSame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207