MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386421018 · doi:10.1364/oe.501741

Effect of laser wavelength on soil carbon measurements using laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy

2023· article· en· W4386421018 on OpenAlexafffund
Shubho Mohajan, Yingchao Huang, N. F. Beier, Miles Dyck, Frank A. Hegmann, Abdul Bais, Amina Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Regina
FundersAlberta InnovatesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsLaser-induced breakdown spectroscopyMaterials scienceLaserSpectroscopyWavelengthCalibrationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsPartial least squares regressionCarbon fibersOptoelectronicsChemistryEnvironmental chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the effect of laser wavelength on laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) on the measurement of carbon in agricultural soils. Two laser wavelengths, 1064 nm and 532 nm, were used to determine soil carbon concentration. No chemical pretreatment, grinding, or pelletization was performed on soil samples to simulate in-field conditions. A multivariate calibration model with outlier filtering and optimized parameters in partial least squared regression (PLSR) was established and validated. The calibration model estimated carbon content in soils with an average prediction error of 4.7% at a laser wavelength of 1064 nm and 2.7% at 532 nm. The limit of detection (LOD) range for 532 nm was 0.34-0.5 w/w%, approximately half of the LOD range for 1064 nm laser wavelength. The improvement in prediction error and LOD of LIBS measurements is attributed to the increase in plasma density achieved at 532 nm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicLaser-induced spectroscopy and plasmaFrench-language works237,207