MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972823914 · doi:10.4095/315138

Evaluation of single-use nylon-screened sieves for use with fine-grained sediment samples

2019· report· en· W2972823914 on OpenAlexaff
H D Lougheed, M B McClenaghan, Daniel Layton‐Matthews, M I Leybourne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPolymer-Based Agricultural Enhancements
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSieve (category theory)Sieve analysisMolecular sieveFraction (chemistry)Materials scienceMineralogyContaminationReusePulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceChemistryWaste managementChromatographyMathematicsNanotechnologyEngineeringBiologyAdsorptionOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors set out to evaluate the use of three sieving methods when sieving the <250 micrometres heavy mineral concentrate (HMC) material. As the grain size to be evaluated decreases, unique concerns for sample loss and cross-contamination during processing arise and this study reports a methodology for sieving the <250 micrometres fraction of a HMC using disposable nylon mesh sieves. The disposable sieves result in a significant reduction in sample loss when tested against traditional stainless-steel sieves, and their single use nature eliminates the chance of sample cross-contamination of samples from reuse of a sieve and the need for sieve cleaning between samples.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.163 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 topicPolymer-Based Agricultural EnhancementsFrench-language works237,207