MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134784389 · doi:10.1039/b000572j

Spectrometric determination of silicon in food and biological samples: an interlaboratory trial

2000· article· en· W2134784389 on OpenAlexaff
Kristien Van Dyck, H. Robberecht, Rudy Van Cauwenbergh, H. Deelstra, Josiane Arnaud, Lieve Willemyns, Frank Benijts, Jos� A. Centeno, H W Taylor, Maria Elisa Soares, Maria de Lourdes Bastos, Margarida A. Ferreira, Patrick C. D’Haese, Ludwig V. Lamberts, Michel Hoenig, G�nter Knapp, Stanislaw J. Lugowski, Luc Moëns, J�rgen Riondato, R. Van Grieken, Martine Claes, Rudy Verheyen, Lieve Clement, Marc Uytterhoeven

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants and animals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinachRepeatabilityRelative standard deviationChemistryStandard deviationStandard solutionChromatographySiliconCalibrationStandard additionAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MathematicsDetection limitStatisticsBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accuracy and precision of silicon determination in biological matrices (serum, urine, water, beer and spinach) by spectrometric techniques (when necessary after acid destruction) were assessed by means of a collaborative interlaboratory trial. The trial was set up in accordance with ISO 5725-2 (1994). The relative overall repeatability standard deviation was acceptable. It varied between 4% for spinach powder (mean content: 176 mg kg−1) and 11% for serum (mean content: 5.33 mg L−1). On the other hand, the relative overall between-laboratory standard deviation was found to vary from a satisfactorily 15% for spinach after destruction (mean content: 3.32 mg L−1) to an unacceptable 107% for spinach powder (mean content: 176 mg kg−1). The overall conclusion of the trial was that silicon determination in biological matrices can properly be performed by spectrometric techniques. However, when sample pretreatment (i.e., acid destruction) is needed prior to silicon determination problems still remain.

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)0.054
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical Atomic SpectrometrySame topicAluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants and animalsFrench-language works237,207