MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313454262 · doi:10.1080/10837450.2022.2162081

Insights into tablet sticking: a quantitative case study with an ibuprofen and methocarbamol-based formulation

2023· article· en· W4313454262 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutical Development and Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicDrug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPfizer
KeywordsGranulationCritical quality attributesMaterials scienceIbuprofenCompression (physics)Linear regressionQuality by DesignProcess engineeringChromatographyBiological systemComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsComposite materialChemistryChemical engineeringEngineeringParticle size

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives and Methods Tablet sticking is a continuous accumulation of pharmaceutical powder onto tooling surfaces during compression. Its occurrence greatly impacts tablet productivity, quality attributes, and tooling age. In a previous study, the authors proposed a multivariate data analysis approach to gain insights into tablet sticking directly on the industrial stage. The objective was to determine the combination of factors that could help distinguish between batches affected and unaffected by sticking. The present study aims to generalize this approach by extending it to quantitative predictions of punch sticking intensity. A total of 345 variables was gathered on 28 industrial batches of an ibuprofen and methocarbamol-based formulation.Result and Conclusion Using PLS regression models, it was shown that the association of granulation duration and compression force allows to significantly explain ∼60% of sticking variations of studied formulation. In addition, unlike the classification models developed in the earlier work, the validation residues in the present study were found to be normally distributed (Shapiro–Wilks p value = 0.96) and independent from the target variable (R2 = 9.5%).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.277 · 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