MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improvements in Digestion Protocols for Trace Element and Isotope Determinations in Stream and Lake Sediment Reference Materials (JSd‐1, JSd‐2, JSd‐3, JLk‐1 and LKSD‐1)

2009· article· en· W2108718792 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sidonie Révillon, D. Hureau-Mazaudier

Bibliographic record

VenueGeostandards and Geoanalytical Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueInstitut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer
KeywordsDissolutionCertified reference materialsTrace elementSedimentEnvironmental chemistryIsotopeZirconChemistryEnvironmental scienceMineralogyGeologyChromatographyGeochemistryDetection limitPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Total dissolution is a critical step in geochemical analysis. Despite the number of published protocols, this issue still draws attention for sediment samples, which are particularly difficult to dissolve due to the common occurrence and high abundance of refractory phases such as zircon. We present tests of different chemical digestion procedures carried out on reference materials (RM) of stream (JSd‐1, JSd‐2 and JSd‐3) and lake (JLk‐1 and LKSD‐1) sediments from the Geological Survey of Japan (GSJ) and the Canadian Certified Reference Material Programme (CCRPM). We demonstrate that the fusion technique is not appropriate for our studies as not all elements of interest were recovered and blank levels were too high to permit further Sr and Pb isotopic composition measurements. Similarly, conventional HF+HNO3 dissolution methods were not efficient enough for detrital samples. Our preferred method involved using high pressure Teflon® vessel bombs in association with HClO4. This protocol ensured a complete dissolution of the powder, as well as a complete recovery of trace elements. Moreover, blank levels were sufficiently low that Sr or Pb isotope compositions could be measured from the same mother solution. We also tested the homogeneity of RM powders by performing tests on various amount of powder.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.335 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeostandards and Geoanalytical ResearchSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207