Trace determination of gadolinium by conductivity-based approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A conductivity-based technique is developed for the determination of Gd3+in the heavy water moderators of pressurized heavy water reactors (PHWRs). The method involves monitoring extremely small shifts in conductivity, in the order of few nS/cm, due to the continuous addition of a suitable complexing agent to Gd3+in aqueous medium. The resulting plot gives two distinct regions with vastly differing slopes. Two multidentate ligands, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and diethylenetriaminepentaaceticacid (DTPA), as complexing agents are compared. A high performing conductivity detector based on a new class of sensors called pulsating sensors that works entirely in the digital domain is deployed to monitor the conductivity shifts. Titration plots are studied in both H2O and D2O, and the observed difference between the plots in the two matrices is discussed in detail. Boron did not interfere in the analysis. The method was validated using the UV–vis spectrophotometric technique. The method is sensitive and rapid, as each analysis takes 3 min. The limit of detection in H2O and D2O are 1.27×10−7mol/L and 5.1×10−7mol/L, respectively. The precision in analysis lies between 1.9% and 5.3%. This method has important application in the nuclear industry for the routine analysis of gadolinium.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".