MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246361575 · doi:10.1201/b12522-151

Homogeneity and stability testing of a candidate reference material for the determination of total arsenic in tuna fish sample

2012· book-chapter· en· W2246361575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Buchari T.A. Koesmawati

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomogeneity (statistics)Fish <Actinopterygii>TunaFisheryArsenicSample (material)Environmental scienceStatisticsBiologyMathematicsChemistryMaterials scienceChromatographyMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Total arsenic in tuna fish is usually found in relatively very low concentrations of below 10 μg/g. Two major difficulties in the measurement of total arsenic in tuna fish are the concentration and its matrix interferences. Accuracy and precision in its measurement is mandatory for an accreditated testing laboratory, therefore the availability of a suitable Reference Material (RM) is necessary. RM is a material or substance with one or more of its properties being sufficiently homogeneous and stable that are well established to be used for calibration of an apparatus, the assessment of a measurement method, or for assigning values to materials (ISO Guide 30-Ref C1). RMs are necessary in method development and validation, estimation of measurement uncertainty, internal quality control, proficiency testing and training. Both homogeneity and stability are essensial in the preparation of a RM of biological origin. The National Research Council Canada (NRC) developed Certified Reference Material (CRM) DORM-2, dogfish muscle CRM for trace metals, which was recently replaced by DORM-3. However, in Indonesia CRMs are difficult to purchase. The objective of this study is to provide a RM which can be used as an in-house reference bottle number was applied in this analysis. Statistical analysis was carried out and the uncertainty of homogeneity for total arsenic was calculated using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyFrench-language works237,207