MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192541338 · doi:10.3390/heritage4030089

Retrieving Tarnished Daguerreotype Content Using X-ray Fluorescence Imaging—Recent Observations on the Effect of Chemical and Electrochemical Cleaning Methods

2021· article· en· W3192541338 on OpenAlexafffund
Alison Stark, Fraser P. Filice, James J. Noël, Ronald R. Martin, Tsun‐Kong Sham, Y. Zou Finfrock, Steve M. Heald

Bibliographic record

VenueHeritage · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)Western University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSynchrotronX-ray fluorescenceMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MicroscopyElectrochemistryFluorescenceX-rayOpticsChemistryElectrodeEnvironmental chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a study on the effect of chemical and electrochemical cleaning of tarnished daguerreotypes observed using X-ray fluorescence (XRF) microscopy with a micro-focussed X-ray beam from a synchrotron source. It has been found that, while both techniques result in some success depending on the condition of the plate and the experimental parameters (chemical concentration, voltage, current, etc.) the effect varies, and cleaning is often incomplete. The XRF images using Hg Lα,β at an excitation energy just above the L3 edge threshold produce fine images, regardless of the treatment. This finding confirms previous observations that if the bulk of the image particles remains intact, the surface tarnish has little effect on the quality of the original daguerreotype image retrievable from XRF.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeritageSame topicCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisFrench-language works237,207