Rapid Identification of Novel Psychoactive and Other Controlled Substances Using Low-Field <sup>1</sup>H NMR Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An automated approach to the collection of 1H NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) spectra using a benchtop NMR spectrometer and the subsequent analysis, processing, and elucidation of components present in seized drug samples are reported. An algorithm is developed to compare spectral data to a reference library of over 300 1H NMR spectra, ranking matches by a correlation-based score. A threshold for identification was set at 0.838, below which identification of the component present was deemed unreliable. Using this system, 432 samples were surveyed and validated against contemporaneously acquired GC–MS (gas chromatography–mass spectrometry) data. Following removal of samples which possessed no peaks in the GC–MS trace or in both the 1H NMR spectrum and GC–MS trace, the remaining 416 samples matched in 93% of cases. Thirteen of these samples were binary mixtures. A partial match (one component not identified) was obtained for 6% of samples surveyed whilst only 1% of samples did not match at all.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".