MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066806597 · doi:10.1039/c5lc00283d

Through the years with on-a-chip gas chromatography: a review

2015· review· en· W2066806597 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

VenueLab on a Chip · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGas chromatographyMicroelectromechanical systemsChipVolume (thermodynamics)ChromatographyNanotechnologyChemistryMaterials scienceEngineeringTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the need for measurement and detection of samples in situ or with very small volume and low concentration (low and sub-parts per billion) is a cause for miniaturizing systems via microelectromechanical system (MEMS) technology. Gas chromatography (GC) is a common technique that is widely used for separating and measuring semi-volatile and volatile compounds. Conventional GCs are bulky and cannot be used for in situ analysis, hence in the past decades many studies have been reported with the aim of designing and developing chip-based GC. The focus of this review is to follow and investigate the development and the achievements in the field of chip-based GC and its components from the beginning up to the present.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.244 · 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