On‐line HfF <sub>5</sub> <sup>−</sup> /WF <sub>5</sub> <sup>−</sup> separation in an O <sub>2</sub> ‐filled radiofrequency quadrupole gas cell
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: An experimental Isobar Separator for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (ISAMS) instrument has been used to demonstrate an on-line separation of HfF5(-) from its isobar WF5(-). This is necessary, in addition to sample preparation chemistry, for measuring (182)Hf at natural levels by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS). METHODS: The device utilizes a radiofrequency quadrupole (RFQ) controlled gas cell, wherein anion-gas reactions at eV energies attenuate the interfering isobars of the analyte molecular anions, leaving HfF5(-) for AMS analysis. The RFQ also helps to control the multiple scattering resulting from the ion-gas collisions. RESULTS: O2 gas was used in the HfF5(-)/WF5(-) separation and WF5(-) was attenuated by nearly 3 orders of magnitude while maintaining ~75% transmission of HfF5(-). It is expected that the transmission and attenuation can be increased by further research. CONCLUSIONS: This result advances the possibility of detecting natural (182)Hf when AMS is supplemented with an isobar separator in the injection system.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".