Detection of chlorinated quinones using interdigitated electrodes coupled with capillary electrophoresis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An array of eight interdigitated microband gold electrodes (IDEs) has been developed together with electrophoretic separation for analysis of chlorinated hydroquinones (ClHQs) and benzoquinones (ClBQs). The IDE chip positioned very close to the separation capillary outlet served as an amplification/detection system without the requirement for frequent "capillary-electrode" alignment. ClHQs, electrophoretically migrating to the IDE surface, were oxidized at +1.1 V by seven electrodes of the array and then detected by the remaining electrode, poised at -0.1 V. Conversely, ClBQs were detected at +1.1 V by the detecting electrode after having been reduced at the 7 adjacent electrodes poised at -0.1 V. There was an amplification effect on both the detecting electrode as well as the adjacent electrodes because of the recycle between ClHQs and ClBQs. The detecting "amplification" current response was dependent on the potentials applied, the position of the detecting electrode on the array, the number of adjacent electrodes being used for recycling and the distance between the oxidative and reductive electrodes. Micellar electrokinetic chromatography (MEKC) separation of the analytes was achieved using 30 mM sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) with a detection limit in the range of 2-20 micro M. In addition to a facile "capillary-electrode" alignment, the important aspect described here was the capability of detecting through recycling a reduced compound (in the case of ClHQs) at a negative potential to circumvent fouling and electroactive interferences. An appealing feature was also the concurrent oxidation/reduction detection for each compound to ascertain peak assignment, as interfering compounds are less likely to exhibit the same oxidative/reductive characteristics and electrophoretic mobilities as the target analytes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".