MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2378437550

Determination of Bifenthrin in Tea by Ultra Performance Convergence Chromatography and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

2015· article· en· W2378437550 on OpenAlexaff
Li Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCHINESE JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY (CHINESE VERSION) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryBifenthrinChromatographySupercritical fluid chromatographyMass spectrometrySupercritical fluidDetection limitGas chromatographyPesticide
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method was developed for the determination of bifenthrin in tea by ultra performance convergence chromatography( UPC2). The samples were extracted with petroleum ether and cleaned up with Waters SepPakCarbon NH2,and then detected by UPC2. The mobile phase was the mixture of supercritical CO2 and acetonitrile at a flow rate of 1. 5 m L / min. The separation was conducted on a column of ACQUITY UPC2 TM BEH( 100 mm × 3. 0 mm,1. 7 μm). The UV detector was set at a wavelength of 220 nm. The detection limit was 20 μg / L. The linear range of bifenthrin was 0. 32- 10. 30 mg / L. The recoveries ranged from 88. 7% to98. 2%. The relative standard deviations( RSD) were from 1. 4% to 2. 8%. The result showed that the UPC2 was more efficient,rapid and low-cost than GC-MS. The method can meet the testing requirements of bifenthrin in tea. The efficacy of UPC2 on testing the concentration of bifenthrin in tea was compared with GC-MS based on National Proficiency Testing and the results were satisfactory.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCHINESE JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY (CHINESE VERSION)Same topicAnalytical Chemistry and ChromatographyFrench-language works237,207