MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143673821 · doi:10.1039/b713934a

Improved in situ measurements of lead isotopes in silicate glasses by LA-MC-ICPMS using multiple ion counters

2008· article· en· W2143673821 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Kate Souders, Paul Sylvester

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIsotopeSilicate glassAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryLead (geology)SilicateIn situIonResolution (logic)High resolutionMineralogyGeologyEnvironmental chemistryPhysicsRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new technique that improves the spatial resolution and quantification limits of the measurement of lead isotope ratios in silicate glasses with <15 μg g−1 total Pb by LA-MC-ICPMS is presented. The new method provides the capability of making quantitative, in situ lead isotope measurements on tiny objects of geologic interest such as mineral growth bands, melt inclusions, and accessory minerals, even where they are lead poor. The method allows for the concurrent, static measurement of 204Pb, 206Pb, 207Pb, 208Pb along with 202Hg in five Channeltron ion counters. Standard-sample-standard bracketing using USGS BCR2-G as the calibrant is used to correct for instrumental mass bias. Accuracy and precision of the method was evaluated by replicate analyses of various MPI-DING reference glasses with low lead concentrations (∼1–11 μg g−1) and well-determined isotopic ratios. Spot sizes for in situ analyses were as small as 40–69 μm, providing better spatial resolution than previous LA-MC-ICPMS results reporting 204Pb. Measured lead isotope ratios for the MPI-DING reference glasses T1-G (11.6 μg g−1 total Pb) and ATHO-G (5.67 μg g−1 total Pb) agree within 0.10% and 0.15% respectively of the preferred values using 40 μm spots. For MPI-DING KL2-G (2.07 μg g−1 total Pb) and ML3B-G (1.38 μg g−1 total Pb) measured lead ratios agree within 0.75% of the accepted values with typical precisions of <1.9% (2RSD) using 69 μm spots; measured 207Pb/206Pb and 208Pb/206Pb are within 0.45% of preferred values with precisions of <0.50% (2RSD). These results demonstrate improvement over previous LA-MC-ICPMS data in terms of both quantification limits and spatial resolution, while retaining similar levels of accuracy and precision.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical Atomic SpectrometrySame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207