High‐precision isotopic characterization of USGS reference materials by TIMS and MC‐ICP‐MS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Pacific Centre for Isotopic and Geochemical Research (PCIGR) at the University of British Columbia has undertaken a systematic analysis of the isotopic (Sr, Nd, and Pb) compositions and concentrations of a broad compositional range of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) reference materials, including basalt (BCR‐1, 2; BHVO‐1, 2), andesite (AGV‐1, 2), rhyolite (RGM‐1, 2), syenite (STM‐1, 2), granodiorite (GSP‐2), and granite (G‐2, 3). USGS rock reference materials are geochemically well characterized, but there is neither a systematic methodology nor a database for radiogenic isotopic compositions, even for the widely used BCR‐1. This investigation represents the first comprehensive, systematic analysis of the isotopic composition and concentration of USGS reference materials and provides an important database for the isotopic community. In addition, the range of equipment at the PCIGR, including a Nu Instruments Plasma MC‐ICP‐MS, a Thermo Finnigan Triton TIMS, and a Thermo Finnigan Element2 HR‐ICP‐MS, permits an assessment and comparison of the precision and accuracy of isotopic analyses determined by both the TIMS and MC‐ICP‐MS methods (e.g., Nd isotopic compositions). For each of the reference materials, 5 to 10 complete replicate analyses provide coherent isotopic results, all with external precision below 30 ppm (2 SD) for Sr and Nd isotopic compositions (27 and 24 ppm for TIMS and MC‐ICP‐MS, respectively). Our results also show that the first‐ and second‐generation USGS reference materials have homogeneous Sr and Nd isotopic compositions. Nd isotopic compositions by MC‐ICP‐MS and TIMS agree to within 15 ppm for all reference materials. Interlaboratory MC‐ICP‐MS comparisons show excellent agreement for Pb isotopic compositions; however, the reproducibility is not as good as for Sr and Nd. A careful, sequential leaching experiment of three first‐ and second‐generation reference materials (BCR, BHVO, AGV) indicates that the heterogeneity in Pb isotopic compositions, and concentrations, could be directly related to contamination by the steel (mortar/pestle) used to process the materials. Contamination also accounts for the high concentrations of certain other trace elements (e.g., Li, Mo, Cd, Sn, Sb, W) in various USGS reference materials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".