MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626439834 · doi:10.1515/pac-2016-0808

A critical review of the proposed definitions of fundamental chemical quantities and their impact on chemical communities (IUPAC Technical Report)

2017· review· en· W2626439834 on OpenAlexafffund
Roberto Marquardt, Juris Meija, Zoltán Mester, Marcy H. Towns, Ron D. Weir, Richard Davis, Jürgen Stohner

Bibliographic record

VenuePure and Applied Chemistry · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaNational Research Council Canada
FundersInternational Union of Nutritional SciencesNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsChemical nomenclatureAvogadro constantChemistryWork (physics)KilogramUnits of measurementConstant (computer programming)ThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryComputer sciencePhysicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the proposed new SI, the kilogram will be redefined in terms of the Planck constant and the mole will be redefined in terms of the Avogadro constant. These redefinitions will have some consequences for measurements in chemistry. The goal of the Mole Project (IUPAC Project Number 2013-048-1-100) was to compile published work related to the definition of the quantity ‘amount of substance’, its unit the ‘mole’, and the consequence of these definitions on the unit of the quantity mass, the kilogram. The published work has been reviewed critically with the aim of assembling all possible aspects in order to enable IUPAC to judge the adequateness of the existing definitions or new proposals. Compilation and critical review relies on the broadest spectrum of interested IUPAC members.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.446
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.034 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePure and Applied ChemistrySame topicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationFrench-language works237,207