MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527158965 · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b02656

Flow Injection Single Particle Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry: An Original Simple Approach for the Characterization of Metal-Based Nanoparticles

2016· article· en· W2527158965 on OpenAlexafffund
Ram P. Lamsal, Gregory Jerkiewicz, Diane Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryDwell timeMass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Particle (ecology)NanoparticleVolumetric flow rateParticle sizeDetection limitInductively coupled plasmaChromatographyNanotechnologyPlasmaMechanicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, single-particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICPMS) has emerged as a reliable tool that can both count metal-containing nanoparticles and measure their mass, thereby allowing sizing if their shape, density, and composition are known. However, the methodology associated with the current spICPMS approach for mass determination requires determination of both the sample uptake rate and the sample introduction efficiency of the nebulization system. In this paper, the proof of concept of a novel approach based on flow injection (FI) analysis coupled to ICPMS, i.e., FI-spICPMS, is presented. Unlike the established technique, this method does not require a determination of the transport efficiency and of the sample uptake rate for the accurate measurement of particle mass. It also only requires a measurement of the transport efficiency for determination of the particle number. Unlike the traditional spICPMS approach, the measurement of transport efficiency by FI-spICPMS is not affected by changes in sample uptake rate. The efficiency of FI-spICPMS is demonstrated through accurate determination of the particle number and size of 60 nm citrate-coated gold nanoparticles suspended in high-purity water. Despite being simpler, the method provides similar results to those obtained by the established spICPMS method. With a 5 ms dwell time and 200 μs settling time, the size detection limit is 20 nm, i.e., the same as with spICPMS.

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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsFrench-language works237,207