MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105084411 · doi:10.1351/pac-rec-06-04-06

Definitions of terms relating to mass spectrometry (IUPAC Recommendations 2013)

2013· article· en· W2105084411 on OpenAlexaff
Kermit K. Murray, Robert K. Boyd, Marcos N. Eberlin, G. John Langley, Liang Li, Yasuhide Naito

Bibliographic record

VenuePure and Applied Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemical nomenclatureChemistryTerminologyMass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChromatographyOrganic chemistryLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This document contains recommendations for terminology in mass spectrometry. Development of standard terms dates back to 1974 when the IUPAC Commission on Analytical Nomenclature issued recommendations on mass spectrometry terms and definitions. In 1978, the IUPAC Commission on Molecular Structure and Spectroscopy updated and extended the recommendations and made further recommendations regarding symbols, acronyms, and abbreviations. The IUPAC Physical Chemistry Division Commission on Molecular Structure and Spectroscopy’s Subcommittee on Mass Spectroscopy revised the recommended terms in 1991 and appended terms relating to vacuum technology. Some additional terms related to tandem mass spectrometry were added in 1993 and accelerator mass spectrometry in 1994. Owing to the rapid expansion of the field in the intervening years, particularly in mass spectrometry of biomolecules, a further revision of the recommendations has become necessary. This document contains a comprehensive revision of mass spectrometry terminology that represents the current consensus of the mass spectrometry community.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0170.018
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0070.006
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.090

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations675
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePure and Applied ChemistrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207