A simple, fast, and accurate thermodynamic‐based approach for transfer and prediction of gas chromatography retention times between columns and instruments Part I: Estimation of reference column geometry and thermodynamic parameters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transfer of retention times based on thermodynamic models between columns can aid in separation optimization and compound identification in gas chromatography. Although earlier investigations have been reported, this problem remains unsuccessfully addressed. One barrier is poor predictive accuracy when moving from a reference column or system to a new target column or system. This is attributed to challenges associated with the accurate determination of the effective geometric parameters of the columns. To overcome this, we designed least squares-based models that account for geometric parameters of the columns and thermodynamic parameters of compounds as they partition between mobile and stationary phases. Quasi-Newton-based algorithms were then used to perform the numerical optimization. In this first of three parts, the model used to determine the geometric parameters of the reference column and the thermodynamic parameters of compounds subjected to separation is introduced. As will be shown, the overall approach significantly improves the predictive accuracy and transferability of thermodynamic data (and retention times) between columns of the same stationary phase chemistry. The data required for the determination of the thermodynamic parameters and retention time prediction are obtained from fast and simple experiments. The proposed model and optimization algorithms were tested and validated using simulated and experimental data.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it