MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101911664 · doi:10.1364/ao.49.000c87

Sensitive detection of metals in water using laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy on wood sample substrates

2010· article· en· W2101911664 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

VenueApplied Optics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaser-induced breakdown spectroscopyMaterials scienceDetection limitSpectroscopyLaserAqueous solutionAnalyteOpticsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Substrate (aquarium)ChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water contaminated with toxic heavy metals can be a great risk to humans. Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) is a promising candidate to monitor heavy metals in aqueous solutions on site, but the sensitivity is still a major problem. To perform sensitive analysis of analyte metals in aqueous solutions with LIBS, a thin wood sample substrate was used as a liquid absorber to transform the liquid sample analysis to a solid sample analysis. We focus on investigating the performance of this technique using different laser wavelengths (266, 532, and 1064 nm) with a low pulse energy (<5 mJ) and a different number of shots (from 10 to 1000). We demonstrate that a limit of detection of 30 ppb can be achieved using low energy pulses with a 1000 shot accumulation. This technique provides a potentially simple approach for a portable micro LIBS system to monitor water samples.

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 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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