MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151515964 · doi:10.1144/1467-787303-006

Performance of commercial laboratories in analysis of geochemical samples for gold and the platinum group elements

2003· article· en· W2151515964 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlatinum groupGroup (periodic table)PlatinumGeochemistryGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twenty-six international geological certified reference materials (CRM) and two in-house soil control samples were gathered and submitted ‘blind’ in duplicate to five commercial geochemical laboratories for the determination of Au and the platinum group elements (PGEs). The methods employed comprise: Pb fire assay (PbFA) combined with inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS); NiS fire assay combined with ICP-MS or instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA); and aqua regia ICP-MS, with and without prior roasting of the sample at 600 o C. The CRMs vary widely in their matrix and PGE concentrations, ranging from a background soil (e.g. GPt-1), sediment (e.g. GPt-2, JSd-2), and rock (e.g. WGB-1, CHR-Bkg) to altered rocks (e.g. WPR-1) and ore material (e.g. GPt-6, SARM-7b, WMS-1). The results of this ‘round-robin’ are provided and discussed in this paper. Results for Au showed the greatest variation across the laboratories, with one evidently encountering significant and spurious contamination. Comparison of the two fire assay techniques for Au, Pt and Pd was difficult as the number of data points was low and the variance within each technique across laboratories was too high. In general, PbFA-based methods for Au, Pt and Pd produced more accurate and precise results than those by NiS fusion and the data support PbFA detection limits for a 5–10 g sample of 1, 0.1 and 0.5 ppb for Au, Pt and Pd, respectively. A PbFA dataset for Rh demonstrated that this element is not recovered efficiently using an Ag inquart. Measurement of Rh by INAA rather than ICP-MS following NiS fusion facilitates detection below 1 ppb to c. 0.1–0.2 ppb. NiS/ICP-MS results for Ru, Os and Ir support detection limits of 1–2, 2–3 and 0.1 ppb, respectively; mean precision for these elements is in the range 10–15% RSD. Recovery of Os was very low by one laboratory, probably caused by its volatilization as OsO 4 during final digestion in the NiS procedure. As expected, recovery of the analytes by aqua regia was low and highly variable across the different matrices for Pt, Ru, Os and Ir but that for Au and Pd was often >80%; prior roasting of the samples had mixed effects.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.197 · 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