MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953703910 · doi:10.1017/9781107707399.004

Use of Multi-collector ICP-MS for Studying Biogeochemical Metal Cycling

2019· book-chapter· en· W2953703910 on OpenAlexaff
Kai Liu, Lingling Wu, Sherry L. Schiff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeochemistry and Elemental Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCarleton UniversityMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiogeochemical cycleInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryEnvironmental chemistryIsotopeMass spectrometryCyclingChemistryNatural abundanceInductively coupled plasmaEnvironmental scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChromatographyPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS) is a powerful technique for the study of biogeochemical cycling of a variety of metals. The advantages of this technique include high ionization efficiency, low detection limits, and rapid analysis. It can produce highly precise and accurate elemental isotope compositions of natural and experimental samples, which can provide insights into the mechanisms of both biological and abiological processes in in natural environments. In this chapter, the operating principles of the instrument, purification of samples, interferences encountered, correction methods to eliminate the instrumental mass discrimination, and data analysis with respect to reliability and reproducibility are discussed. A case study is included that highlights the capability of MC-ICP-MS to infer mechanisms of Fe redox processes in an acidic oligotrophic lake using natural abundance of stable Fe isotopes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicGeochemistry and Elemental AnalysisFrench-language works237,207