MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401637386 · doi:10.1002/jssc.201600436

Ultra‐trace analysis of furanic compounds in transformer/rectifier oils with water extraction and high‐performance liquid chromatography

2016· article· en· W2401637386 on OpenAlexaff
Monica Lin, Kham Lin, Amanda Lin, Ronda Gras, Jim Luong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Transformer Diagnostics and Insulation
Canadian institutionsDow Chemical (Canada)McGill UniversityMuprime Technology (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatographyHigh-performance liquid chromatographyTransformerMaterials scienceExtraction (chemistry)TRACE (psycholinguistics)ChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel approach for the determination of parts-per-billion level of 5-hydroxymethyl-2-furaldehyde, furfuryl alcohol, furfural, 2-furyl methyl ketone, and 5-methylfurfural in transformer or rectifier oils has been successfully innovated and implemented. Various extraction methods including solid-phase extraction, liquid-liquid extraction using methanol, acetonitrile, and water were studied. Water was by far the most efficient solvent for use as an extraction medium. Separation of the analytes was conducted using a 4.6 mm × 250 mm × 3.5 μm Agilent Zorbax column while detection and quantitation were conducted with a variable wavelength UV detector. Detection limits of all furans were at 1 ppb v/v with linear ranges range from 5 to 1000 ppb v/v with correlation coefficients of 0.997 or better. A relative standard deviation of at most 2.4% at 1000 ppb v/v and 7.3% at 5 ppb v/v and a recovery from 43% to 90% depending on the analyte monitored were obtained. The method was purposely designed to be environmental friendly with water as an extraction medium. Also, the method uses 80% water and 20% acetonitrile with a mere 0.2 mL/min of acetonitrile in an acetonitrile/water mixture as mobile phase. The analytical technique has been demonstrated to be highly reliable with low cost of ownership, suitable for deployment in quality control labs or in regions where available analytical resources and solvents are difficult to procure.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Separation ScienceSame topicPower Transformer Diagnostics and InsulationFrench-language works237,207