MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109235722 · doi:10.1016/j.aca.2020.11.049

30 Years of research on ESI/MS response: Trends, contradictions and applications

2020· review· en· W3109235722 on OpenAlexaff
Piia Liigand, Jaanus Liigand, Karl Kaupmees, Anneli Kruve

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytica Chimica Acta · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersStockholms UniversitetEesti Teadusagentuur
KeywordsIonizationChemistryElectrospray ionizationMass spectrometryAmbient ionizationConsistency (knowledge bases)Chemical ionizationChromatographyComputer scienceIonArtificial intelligenceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The variation of ionization efficiency for different compounds has puzzled researchers since the invention of the electrospray mass spectrometry (ESI/MS). Ionization depends on the properties of the compound, eluent, matrix, and instrument. Despite significant research, some aspects have remained unclear. For example, research groups have reached contradicting conclusions regarding the ionization processes. One of the best-known is the significance of the logP value for predicting the ionization efficiency. In this tutorial review, we analyse the methodology used for ionization efficiency measurements as well as the most important trends observed in the data. Additionally, we give suggestions regarding the measurement methodology and modelling strategies to yield meaningful and consistent ionization efficiency data. Finally, we have collected a wide range of ionization efficiency values from the literature and evaluated the consistency of these data. We also make this collection available for everyone for downloading as well as for uploading additional and new ionization efficiency data. We hope this GitHub based ionization efficiency repository will allow a joined community effort to collect and unify the current knowledge about the ionization processes.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations69
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytica Chimica ActaSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207