MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimization of Flow Injection (FI) – Spectrophotometry for Hydroquinone Analysis

2019· article· en· W2911814383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammad Iqbal Fahmi, Hermin Sulistyarti, Ani Mulyasuryani, Adam Wiryawan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Pure and Applied Chemistry Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicDye analysis and toxicity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydroquinonePhloroglucinolChemistrySpectrophotometryChromatographyNuclear chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydroquinone is one of the phenolic compounds used in various cosmetic products for skin lightening as it can inhibit tyrosinase enzyme in producing melanin. However, hydroquinone is classified as a toxic compound, therefore, several countries such as Africa, Canada, and Indonesia prohibits hydroquinone usage in cosmetics. This research was focused on the development of a method for hydroquinone analysis using flow injection (FI) combined with spectrophotometry based on the reaction of hydroquinone with phloroglucinol in alkaline condition producing orange complex detected at 493 nm. The FI method was optimized based on operational factors and chemical factors in order to achieve sensitivity. The maximum sensitivity of FI method was achieved under operational condition of 100 μL sample volume, 100 cm mixing coil 1, 50 cm mixing coil 2 and 2.8 mL/min with the chemical condition of 0.005 mol/L NaOH and 0.001 mol/L phloroglucinol. Under these optimum conditions, the proposed method showed linearity in the range concentration of 2 – 80 mg/L and the method was applied to cosmetic sample with acceptable recovery

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Pure and Applied Chemistry ResearchSame topicDye analysis and toxicityFrench-language works237,207