MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389750054 · doi:10.1039/d3cc04974d

Single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and its variations for the analysis of nanoparticles

2023· article· en· W4389750054 on OpenAlexafffund
Zichao Zhou, Diane Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNebulizerInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Mass spectrometryParticle (ecology)ChemistryVolumetric flow rateNanoparticleCalibration curveCalibrationInductively coupled plasmaPlasmaChromatographyMaterials scienceNanotechnologyMechanicsDetection limit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICPMS) can count and weigh metal-containing nanoparticles (NPs), enabling their sizing if their geometry, density, and composition are known. With a nebulizer and a spray chamber for sample introduction, both the sample uptake rate and the transport efficiency must be determined when calibrating with solutions. In contrast, flow injection (FI) and mono-segmented flow analysis (MSFA) coupled to spICPMS do not need determination of the transport efficiency and sample uptake rate for accurate NP mass measurement. Correcting for the significant settling time on some instruments is also discussed, as well as calibration through signal integration instead of averaging, which eliminates the need to measure the transport efficiency when seeking NP mass. Nitrogen added to the outer plasma gas can reduce the background for the determination of P, S, Ca and Fe. Infrared heating of the sample introduction system provides 100% transport efficiency, enabling accurate particle mass and concentration measurements without measurement of transport efficiency.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical CommunicationsSame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207