MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408680906 · doi:10.1385/1-59259-045-4:251

Kinetic Analysis of Enzymatic and Nonenzymatic Degradation of Peptides by MALDI-TOFMS

2003· review· en· W2408680906 on OpenAlexaff
Fred Rosche, Jörn Schmidt, Torsten Hoffmann, Robert P. Pauly, Christopher H.S. McIntosh, Raymond A. Pederson, Hans‐Ulrich Demuth

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalyteChromatographyChemistryCapillary electrophoresisMass spectrometrySubstrate (aquarium)High-performance liquid chromatographyDesorptionMatrix-assisted laser desorption/ionizationOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently used methods for investigating kinetics of peptide degradation such as refractive index monitoring, radioimmunoassay (RIA), high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), or capillary electrophoresis (CE) are time consuming, need large amounts of substrate, and are often too insensitive. Moreover, as in the case of RIA, HPLC, and CE, it is often impossible to interpret the observed results with confidence in the integrity of the analyte. To circumvent such obstacles, we found matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) used with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (TOFMS) not only useful for qualitative analysis of reaction pathways but also for quantification. In the following chapter, we give two examples of kinetic reaction course evaluation, one non-enzymatic and one enzymatic.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207