MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089966260 · doi:10.1039/b608010c

The uncertainty budget of the multi-element analysis of glasses using LA-ICP-MS

2006· article· en· W2089966260 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

VenueJournal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNISTCalibrationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Standard uncertaintyMeasurement uncertaintyAnalyteInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryEnvironmental scienceChemistryMass spectrometryNuclear engineeringStatisticsMathematicsEnvironmental chemistryChromatographyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A first attempt was made to estimate an uncertainty budget for the multi-element analysis of glasses using LA-ICP-MS, in accordance with the ‘‘Bottom-up’’ approach of the EURACHEM/CITAC-Guide.1 Analyses of NIST SRM 612, 614 and USGS glasses BCR-2G and BIR-1G were carried out using a 193 nm excimer LA-ICP-MS under routine conditions. Calibration was performed using NIST 610 with internal standardisation using Ca. The uncertainty budgets for the analytes Co, La and Th were studied. Instrumental drift and uncertainties from working values of NIST 610, as reported by Pearce et al.,2 are the dominant sources of uncertainty for a typical individual analysis of NIST 612 and BCR-2G/BIR-1G with mass contents of Co, La and Th ranging from 6 to 52 μg g−1. In contrast, the uncertainty contributions from Poisson counting statistics prevail for those of NIST 614 and BIR-1G with the three elements having a lower range between 0.029 and 0.75 μg g−1. La was an exception. Its combined uncertainties were consistently dominated by its uncertainty from the working value of NIST 610 at all mass content ranges investigated, suggesting that more accurate reference values for the analyte in NIST 610, and for all analytes with large uncertainties, are needed. Additionally, a z-score assessment was carried out using procedures similar to those used in the International Proficiency Test for Analytical Microprobe Geochemistry Laboratories. The z-scores in this study were in the range −2 < z < 2, indicating that there were no significant unsuspected influences in the analytical system. This suggests that the uncertainty budget reported here contains all the significant parameters.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.289 · 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