In vivo comprehensive multiphase NMR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Traditionally, due to different hardware requirements, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) has developed as two separate fields: one dealing with solids, and one with solutions. Comprehensive multiphase (CMP) NMR combines all electronics and hardware (magic angle spinning [MAS], gradients, high power Radio Frequency (RF) handling, lock, susceptibility matching) into a universal probe that permits a comprehensive study of all phases (i.e., liquid, gel‐like, semisolid, and solid), in intact samples. When applied in vivo, it provides unique insight into the wide array of bonds in a living system from the most mobile liquids (blood, fluids) through gels (muscle, tissues) to the most rigid (exoskeleton, shell). In this tutorial, the practical aspects of in vivo CMP NMR are discussed including: handling the organisms, rotor preparation, sample spinning, water suppression, editing experiments, and finishes with a brief look at the potential of other heteronuclei ( 2 H, 15 N, 19 F, 31 P) for in vivo research. The tutorial is aimed as a general resource for researchers interested in developing and applying MAS‐based approaches to living organisms. Although the focus here is CMP NMR, many of the approaches can be adapted (or directly applied) using conventional high‐resolution magic angle spinning, and in some cases, even standard solid‐state NMR probes.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".