MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067797287 · doi:10.1002/rcm.4105

A novel approach for the homogenization of cellulose to use micro‐amounts for stable isotope analyses

2009· article· en· W2067797287 on OpenAlexfundno aff
W. Laumer, Laia Andreu‐Hayles, Gerhard Helle, Gerhard H. Schleser, Tadeusz Wieloch, Holger Wissel

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsCelluloseChemistryStable isotope ratioIsotopeGrindingChemical engineeringPulp and paper industryChromatographyComposite materialOrganic chemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate reconstructions using stable isotopes from tree-rings are steadily increasing. The investigations concentrate mostly on cellulose due to its high stability. In recent years the available amount of cellulose has steadily decreased, mainly because micro-structures of plant material have had to be analyzed. Today, the amounts of cellulose being studied are frequently in the milligram and often in the microgram range. Consequently, homogeneity problems with regard to the stable isotopes of carbon and oxygen from cellulose have occurred and these have called for new methods in the preparation of cellulose for reliable isotope analyses. Three different methods were tested for preparing isotopically homogenous cellulose, namely mechanical grinding, freezing by liquid nitrogen with subsequent milling and ultrasonic breaking of cellulose fibres. The best precision of isotope data was achieved by freeze-milling and ultrasonic breaking. However, equipment for freeze-milling is expensive and the procedure is labour-intensive. Mechanical grinding resulted in a rather high loss of material and it is also labour-intensive. The use of ultrasound for breaking cellulose fibres proved to be the best method in terms of rapidity of sample throughput, avoidance of sample loss, precision of isotope results, ease of handling, and cost.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations191
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Communications in Mass SpectrometrySame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207