Mass resolution of linear quadrupole ion traps with round rods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Auxiliary dipole excitation is widely used to eject ions from linear radio-frequency quadrupole ion traps for mass analysis. Linear quadrupoles are often constructed with round rod electrodes. The higher multipoles introduced to the electric potential by round rods might be expected to change the ion ejection process. We have therefore investigated the optimum ratio of rod radius, r, to field radius, r0, for excitation and ejection of ions. METHODS: Trajectory calculations are used to determine the excitation contour, S(q), the fraction of ions ejected when trapped at q values close to the ejection (or excitation) q. Initial conditions are randomly selected from Gaussian distributions of the x and y coordinates and a thermal distribution of velocities. The N = 6 (12 pole) and N = 10 (20 pole) multipoles are added to the quadrupole potential. Peak shapes and resolution were calculated for ratios r/r0 from 1.09 to 1.20 with an excitation time of 1000 cycles of the trapping radio-frequency. RESULTS: Ratios r/r0 in the range 1.140 to 1.160 give the highest resolution and peaks with little tailing. Ratios outside this range give lower resolution and peaks with tails on either the low-mass side or the high-mass side of the peaks. This contrasts with the optimum ratio of 1.126-1.130 for a quadrupole mass filter operated conventionally at the tip of the first stability region. With the optimum geometry the resolution is 2.7 times greater than with an ideal quadrupole field. Adding only a 2.0% hexapole field to a quadrupole field increases the resolution by a factor of 1.6 compared with an ideal quadrupole field. Addition of a 2.0% octopole lowers resolution and degrades peak shape. With the optimum value of r/r0 , the resolution increases with the ejection time (measured in cycles of the trapping rf, n) approximately as R0.5 = 6.64n, in contrast to a pure quadrupole field where R0.5 = 1.94n. CONCLUSIONS: Adding weak nonlinear fields to a quadrupole field can improve the resolution with mass-selective ejection of ions by up to a factor of 2.7. The optimum ratio r/r0 is 1.14 to 1.16, which differs from the optimum ratio for a mass filter of 1.128-1.130.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".