MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073150667 · doi:10.1021/ac8010582

Speciation of Chromium by High-Performance Thin-Layer Chromatography with Direct Determination by Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

2008· letter· en· W2073150667 on OpenAlexaff
Josiane Lafleur, Eric D. Salin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2008
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsChemistryChromiumChromatographyDetection limitInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Mass spectrometryLaser ablationInductively coupled plasmaSilica gelThin-layer chromatographyStandard solutionLaserPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is of considerable importance to be able to distinguish metallic species because their toxicity depends on their chemical form. Therefore, the analysis of environmental samples can be enhanced by the combination of high-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC) with laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICPMS). In this study, Cr (3+) and Cr (6+) were separated on silica gel HPTLC plates using aqueous mobile phases. Separation was achieved in seconds with retardation factors ( R f ) of 0 and 1 for Cr (3+) and Cr (6+), respectively. LA was used to volatilize the chromium species directly from the chromatographic material prior to ICPMS detection. A linear calibration was obtained, and detection limits (3sigma) of 6 ng for Cr (6+) and 0.4 ng for Cr (3+) were achieved with precision ranging from 3 to 40% at the 95% confidence level. The silicon present in the stationary phase was used as an internal standard. This procedure allows for a rapid separation and quantification, requires only 0.5 muL of sample, and lower detection limits can be achieved through preconcentration.

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 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), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
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 score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.218 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations45
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207