MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390267549 · doi:10.3390/separations11010011

Sulfolane Analysis in Environmental Samples: A Critical Review

2023· review· en· W4390267549 on OpenAlexaff
Merrik Kobarfard, Tadeusz Górecki

Bibliographic record

VenueSeparations · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSulfolaneScrutinySample (material)Environmental scienceFoundation (evidence)Biochemical engineeringEnvironmental analysisComputer scienceChemistryEngineeringSolventGeographyOrganic chemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sulfolane, a highly water-soluble industrial solvent, has raised environmental concerns due to its widespread usage and its prolonged persistence once released into the environment. To assess the extent of contamination effectively, reliable analytical methods are essential. In this review article, the existing methodologies for the sample preparation and determination of sulfolane are systematically examined and evaluated. In brief, existing guidelines for sampling from environmental matrices provide a solid foundation for sulfolane analysis. Notably, there is little variation in the choice of final determination methods, with GC-MS or GC-FID being favored across all studies. However, substantial variability emerges in sample preparation methods. Moreover, upon scrutiny of the analytical procedures utilized in sulfolane analysis, it becomes evident that a considerable number of them are characterized by inefficiency or environmental hazards, often relying on substantial quantities of chlorinated solvents. Through this review, valuable insights into the challenges at hand and potential solutions can be gained, offering a foundation for the development of novel sulfolane analysis methods applicable to a range of environmental matrices. Overall, this field calls for further research to devise efficient and environmentally sustainable analytical methods for sulfolane analysis.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeparationsSame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207