MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893033988 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23344

Experimental methods in chemical engineering: Ultraviolet visible spectroscopy—UV‐Vis

2018· article· en· W2893033988 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fellipy S. Rocha, Anderson J. Gomes, Claure N. Lunardi, Serge Kaliaguine, Gregory S. Patience

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltraviolet visible spectroscopySpectroscopyAbsorbanceMass spectrometryUltravioletTransmittanceMaterials sciencePhotocatalysisNanoparticleDynamic light scatteringDiffuse reflectance infrared fourier transformChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChromatographyNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsOrganic chemistryCatalysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract UV‐vis spectroscopy is an inexpensive, simple, flexible, non‐destructive, analytical method appropriate for a wide class of organic compounds and some inorganic species. UV‐vis spectrophotometers measure the absorbance or transmittance of light passing through a medium as a function of the wavelength. Chemical engineers apply it for quantitative analysis, to derive liquid phase reaction kinetics, and to identify the mechanism at the molecular scale. High performance liquid chromatography and ultra‐high performance liquid chromatography integrate UV‐vis detectors to identify and quantify the concentration of compounds in liquid streams. Combining these techniques with mass spectrometry facilitates identifying all species. UV‐vis diffuse reflectance spectroscopy is a variant with enhanced scattering properties that measures the properties of solids and powders. A bibliometric analysis of the 10 000 most cited papers referring to UV‐vis (2016 and 2017) groups research in four major clusters: nanoparticles and nanostucutres; photocatalysis and water treatment; crystals, complexes, and derivatives; and Ag and Au nanoparticles biological interaction.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.032

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations182
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207