MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134144975 · doi:10.1039/d1an00038a

A reusable, reagent-less free chlorine sensor using gold thin film electrode

2021· article· en· W3134144975 on OpenAlexafffund
Arif Ul Alam, Dennis Clyne, Will Lush, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Sensors
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsChlorineReagentDisinfectantElectrodeChemistryInorganic chemistryEnvironmental chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free chlorine is widely used as a disinfectant in the water industry. Accurate monitoring of the residual free chlorine concentration in water cycles is critical to maintain public health safety. Here, we report on a thin gold film-based reusable and reagent-less free chlorine sensor. A gold thin film of 300 nm thickness was deposited on a polyimide tape, which was placed on a glass substrate and a simple Styrofoam adhesive tape was used to cover the film and expose 0.36 cm2 circular area as the sensing surface. The sensor showed a high sensitivity of 0.327 μA ppm-1, with a linear range of 0 to 6 ppm, and an accuracy of <0.1 ppm with high selectivity in the presence of commonly interfering ions. The sensor response time was 50 s with a negligible hysteresis of 0.06 ppm. The sensor showed very little change in output current in the pH range between 5.2 to 8.4, and temperature range of 20 to 30 °C. Therefore, the sensor operation is reagent-less, does not need frequent calibration, and showed consistent sensing performance with real water samples. The simple fabrication, ease-of-use and reliable sensing performance of the proposed sensor shows feasibility for mass-production and application in remote and resource-limited areas.

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 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 score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicAnalytical Chemistry and SensorsFrench-language works237,207