An appreciation of the scientific researches of Dr Peter H. Dawson
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upon the death of Peter H. Dawson in 2015, mass spectrometry lost a major figure. Within the area of radiofrequency quadrupole electric fields applied to mass spectrometry, Dawson stands alongside its pioneers Wolfgang Paul, Nobelist and inventor of the technology, and Wilson Brubaker, who identified and overcame the deleterious effects of fringing electric fields on quadrupole mass filter performance. Seventy-one of Dawson's 97 scientific publications are concerned with quadrupole mass analysers, ion traps and monopole mass spectrometers. Of especial note are his book and review articles in which he disseminated information on the theoretical fundamentals and practicalities of these systems to a wider audience, thereby having a major impact on the development of this important field of endeavour. The scientific researches of Dr Dawson, and his advice and counsel, influenced to a major degree, and to the better, the research careers, teachings and the lives of the authors of this piece. Their combined researches on quadrupole devices led to the commercialization of the ion trap as a mass spectrometer by which mass spectral information became available at greatly reduced cost. Thus, the advent of commercial ion trapping instruments permitted a greater use of mass spectrometry in both technically advanced countries and those less well advanced. The greatest impact in health services was mass spectrometric analysis of environmental problems, well and stream water, food free of pesticides, etc., and forensic sciences. Our combined indebtedness to Dr Dawson is manifested by this appreciation of his scientific work, the highlighting of his main contributions, and creation of a substantive reference source to his work that can be used by other scientists. A comprehensive list of Dr Dawson's publications, including abstracts or summaries, has been arranged in chronological order of date of submission.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.015 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".