SIM.QM-S10: supplementary comparison for trace elements in skim milk powder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Main text SIM.QM-S10 was performed to assess the analytical capabilities of National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and Designated Institutes (DIs) of SIM members (or other regions) for the accurate determination of trace metals in skim milk powder. The study was proposed by the coordinating laboratories National Research Council Canada (NRC) and INTI Argentina as an activity of Sistema Interamericano de Metrología (SIM) approved by the Inorganic Analysis Working Group (IAWG) of Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance - Metrology in Chemistry and Biology (CCQM). Participants included NMIs/DIs from twelve countries. No measurement method was prescribed by the coordinating laboratories. Therefore, NMIs used measurement methods of their choice. However, the majority of NMIs/DIs used closed vessel microwave system using a mixture of HNO 3 and H 2 O 2 for the digestion and ICP-MS and ICP-OES for the determination of the measurands. One laboratory used INAA technique. This SIM.QM-S10 Supplementary Comparison provides NMIs/DIs with the needed evidence for CMC claims for trace elements in skim milk powder and similar matrices. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report . Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/ . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".