An analytical protocol for determining the elemental chemistry of Quaternary sediments using a portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The modern geologist has a plethora of portable digital tools at their disposal including, GPS, in-field computers providing access to imagery, maps, and on site real time geochemistry provided by portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (pXRF). This paper presents an analytical protocol for the examination of Quaternary glaciogenic sediments derived from different bedrock terrains using a portable spectrometer. The protocol outlines best practices for the collection of geochemical data using pXRF from glacoiogenic sediments with generally continental crustal abundance elemental concentrations at a fraction of the cost of traditional laboratory methods. The analytical protocol considers 1) sample preparation, 2) sample analysis, and 3) data cleaning, examination and presentation. The protocol takes into consideration pXRF fundamentals related to, instrument configuration, and an assessment of measurement parameters, including peak overlaps, dwell time, instrument drift, in-situ versus processed samples, variable grain size and moisture content effects, and comparison to traditional laboratory methods. Protocol development occurred over a number of years and analysis of over 4000 geological samples and ~9000 analysis of Certified and Standard Reference Materials.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it