MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109800430 · doi:10.1002/jssc.200800654

Comprehensive two dimensional gas chromatography review

2009· review· en· W2109800430 on OpenAlexaff
Hernan J. Cortes, Bill Winniford, Jim Luong, Matthias Pursch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Canadian institutionsDow Chemical (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGas chromatographyRelevance (law)Two-dimensional gasBiochemical engineeringComputer scienceChromatographyChemistryEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances, developments and applications in 2-D comprehensive GC (GC x GC) from 2007 through October 2008 are reviewed, with emphasis on modulation, and data handling, and applications of current relevance. Industrial perspectives as well as suggestions where further developments would be beneficial are summarized in the concluding remarks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.007

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.350 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations182
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Separation ScienceSame topicAnalytical Chemistry and ChromatographyFrench-language works237,207