MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111427949 · doi:10.1002/9780470027318.a9218

Current Electrospray Mass Spectrometry: an Overview. Part A. Analyte Atomization

2014· other· en· W2111427949 on OpenAlexaff
Udo H. Verkerk

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrosprayElectric fieldMass spectrometryElectrospray ionizationChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)IonizationAnalyteIonChromatographyPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrospray ionization (ESI) is an atomization and ionization method through which a solution‐phase analyte can be transferred via minute charged droplets into the gas‐phase as an ion. The first part of this two‐part review on electrospray mass spectrometry considers the formation of these minute charged droplets. Atomization of liquids can take place through mechanical or electrostatic breakup of a liquid jet. In the absence of an electric field, charged droplets of both polarities are formed because of the disruption of the electrical double layer at the air–water interface. Addition of an electric field results in the formation of charged droplets of a single polarity. At sufficiently high electric field strength, mechanical jet disruption is replaced by electrostatic jet disruption giving the highest yield of charged droplets; this is the commonly used conductive DC electrospray. More recent means of forming charged droplets by DC or AC electric fields are discussed in the following sections. Mechanisms for reducing the droplet electrostatic stress such as droplet fragmentation are reviewed in the final section. These processes form the basis for the creation of charged gas‐phase analytes that is described in Current Electrospray Mass Spectrometry: an Overview. Part B. Analyte Charging.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.019

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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of Analytical ChemistrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207