Extractive-liquid sampling electron ionization-mass spectrometry (E-LEI-MS): a new powerful combination for direct analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of modern analytical chemistry main challenges is providing as fast as possible results in different application fields. In this view, real-time analysis techniques are experiencing ever-increasing success as they can provide data quickly, almost without sample preparation steps. Most of real-time approaches are based on direct mass spectrometry (DMS), a method of analyzing samples without the need for separation or pre-treatment steps. Instead, the sample is directly introduced into the mass spectrometer for analysis. In this context, ambient ionization mass spectrometry (AIMS) techniques are widely represented and successfully used. Extractive-liquid sampling electron ionization-mass spectrometry (E-LEI-MS) represents a different analytical strategy that allows coupling ambient sampling with electron ionization (EI), avoiding any sample preparation step and providing identification based on the comparison with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) library spectra. E-LEI-MS consists of a dispositive for solvent release and sampling at ambient conditions coupled with an EI source of a single quadrupole mass spectrometer. A micromanipulator allows fine (x,y,z) positioning of a sampling tip. MS can operate in scan or SIM modes depending on the application goals and requirements. Several preliminary successful results were already obtained due to the highly informative EI mass spectra generation. The system was applied to the analysis of active ingredients in pharmaceutical tablets, pesticides on fruit peel, a drug of abuse (cocaine) determination in banknotes, and analysis of unknown components on painting surfaces. Both forensic and artwork applications allowed determining the spatial distribution of the analytes. Here we present a proof-of-concept of E-LEI-MS for targeted/non-targeted analysis and semi-quantitative detection.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".