MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040159871 · doi:10.1017/s1431927600033316

Determining Concentration Limits for Boron Quantification Using EELS and for Energy-Filtered Imaging

2000· article· en· W3040159871 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoronMaterials scienceCarbon fibersIsotopes of boronElectron energy loss spectroscopyEvaporationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Detection limitChemistryNanotechnologyTransmission electron microscopyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Electron energy-loss spectrometry and energy-filtered imaging allow the possibility of detecting, quantifying and mapping of boron. Boron spatial distribution in biological tissue is of particular interest for boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) for cancer. We have studied the limits of boron quantification and mapping using electron energy-loss spectroscopy and energy-filtered imaging. To evaluate the concentration limits for boron mapping and quantification three types of specimens were used. First, a uniform boron layer of well known thickness deposited onto of 50 nm-thick carbon film was used to determine the limits for boron quantification. Second, samples for boron mapping with non-uniform boron distribution were prepared by electron-beam evaporation of boron onto a shadow-masked 50 nm-thick carbon film. Third, tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) in a water solution of boronophenylalanine fructrose (BPA-F) was deposited onto a 2 nm—thick carbon film.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.293 · 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