Development of a next‐generation field‐free atmospheric pressure photoionization source for liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Atmospheric pressure photoionization (APPI) is considered a candidate ionization method suitable for a broad range of liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS) applications. Questions remain, however, regarding the ultimate potential of the technique. We propose that sensitivity and thus detection limits may be restricted by geometric source design, limiting widespread acceptance of the technique. METHODS: The relative performance of two geometrically distinct APPI source configurations was evaluated through comprehensive performance comparison upon a single MS platform. To facilitate a fair comparison, a prototype orthogonal geometry, field-free APPI source was developed and tested against two currently commercially available open-geometry APPI sources. The prototype device was engineered based upon the geometry and functionality of first-generation, co-axial field-free APPI sources. RESULTS: Initial characterization experiments were performed by flow injection analysis using a range of analyte standards exhibiting a variety of chemical properties. A standard panel of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) identified as priority pollutants by the EPA was also analyzed, demonstrating relative performance using an LC/MS workflow. The prototype field-free APPI source demonstrated the potential for order-of-magnitude performance enhancement over open-geometry sources that lack a confined field-free reaction region. CONCLUSIONS: An APPI source configuration that includes an extended field-free reaction region was demonstrated to have the potential to provide enhanced sensitivity relative to commercially available open-geometry source designs. Improved performance will no doubt lead to increased acceptance and widespread application of the technique.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".