MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616722157 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2017-0062

The application of XANES for the examination of silver, gold, mercury, and sulfur on the daguerreotype surface

2017· article· en· W2616722157 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Madalena S. Kozachuk, Ronald R. Martin, Tsun‐Kong Sham, M. Robinson, Andrew J. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanadian Light Source
KeywordsMercury (programming language)XANESChemistrySulfurAlloyGold rushAtomic absorption spectroscopyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)SpectroscopyMineralogyMetallurgyEnvironmental chemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

X-ray absorption near edge structure (XANES) spectroscopy was used to study a freshly prepared reference daguerreotype surface as the first step in devising improved methods for the conservation of these important historic artifacts. The results are consistent with the formation of alloy image particles. Interdiffusion of gold and silver has led to the development of a silver–gold alloy; the composition varies with depth. The amount of gold appeared to be elevated in the highlighted regions of the image, whereas shadow regions have lower levels of gold on the surface. The apparent increase in gold within the highlighted region may be due to the larger surface area presented by an array of small image particles. The mercury used to develop the daguerreian image showed no evidence of oxidation while a mercury–silver alloy was detected. Sulfur-based contaminants are also detected. The implications of these findings are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207