MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512965081 · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b02882

Systematic Approach to Optimization of Experimental Conditions in Nonequilibrium Capillary Electrophoresis of Equilibrium Mixtures

2016· article· en· W2512965081 on OpenAlexafffund
Mirzo Kanoatov, Sina Mehrabanfar, Sergey N. Krylov

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCapillary electrophoresisChemistryNon-equilibrium thermodynamicsTask (project management)Process (computing)Systematic errorIntermolecular forceBiological systemStatistical physicsBiochemical engineeringThermodynamicsChromatographyComputer scienceMoleculeSystems engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonequilibrium capillary electrophoresis of equilibrium mixtures (NECEEM) is an efficient method for studying intermolecular interactions. Optimization of NECEEM experiments is not a trivial task, due to the complex interrelation between numerous experimental parameters and their combined effects on the accuracy and precision of measurements. Here we present an "algorithmic" approach for NECEEM optimization, which eliminates all of the guesswork out of this process and allows researchers to approach it in a systematic manner. We have fully tested our approach using comprehensive in silico analysis and have showed its utility within a real experimental study. The new approach makes NECEEM more robust, resilient to errors, and easily approachable for researchers with varying experience in CE.

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)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207