MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2354857579

Comparision of research methods of vitamin C in infant formula milk powder

2015· article· en· W2354857579 on OpenAlexaff
Liu A-jin

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Analysis Laboratory · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryInfant formulaChromatographyVitaminGradient elutionDetection limitMethanolStandard additionCalibration curveNational standardElutionLinear rangeCalibrationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)High-performance liquid chromatographyMathematicsFood scienceStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of the present study was to discuss the possibility of ultra-performance convergence chromatography( UPC2) for separation and determination of vitamin C in infant formula milk powder by the columns with different stationary phases. Finally,the Waters CSH Fluoro-Phenyl( 3. 0 × 100 mm,1. 7 μm)column was used in the experiments. A gradient elution was performed with the mixed mobile phase of supercritical CO2 and methanol( added 0. 1% H3PO4)) at a flow rate of 0. 6 m L/min. The UV detector was set at a wavelength of 245 nm. The limit of detection was 5 mg / L and the calibration linear range was 5 ~200 mg / L. The average recoveries were 90. 7% ~ 95. 4%,and the relative standard deviation ranged from1. 9% to 2. 8%. Then,we compared the proposed method with standard GB 5413. 18-2010( National food safety standard: Determination of vitamin C in foods for infants and young children,milk and milk products).The results showed that the accuracy and precision of two methods could satisfy the requirement for the determination of Vitamin C. In the standard method,the fluorescence intensity was affected by numerous factors,most of which are difficult to control,thus leading to high requirement of operator skills. In the comparison,the proposed method has the advantages of high efficient, rapid, simplicity, high sensitivity and simple pretreatment. The method was time-saving,low cost and eco-friendly.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.383 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of Analysis LaboratorySame topicAnalytical Chemistry and ChromatographyFrench-language works237,207