MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394931033 · doi:10.1002/xrs.3427

High‐resolution x‐ray emission spectrometry in the lithium K range with a reflection zone plate spectrometer

2024· article· en· W4394931033 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Khalil Hassebi, Nicolas Rividi, Michel Fialin, Anne Verlaguet, Gaston Godard, Jürgen Probst, Heike Löchel, Thomas Krist, Christoph Braig, Christian Seifert, Rabah Benbalagh, Régis Vacheresse, Vita Ilakovac, Karine Le Guen, Philippe Jonnard

Bibliographic record

VenueX-Ray Spectrometry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationMcGill University
KeywordsLithium (medication)SpectrometerContext (archaeology)Reflection (computer programming)Mass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Electron microprobeRange (aeronautics)Materials scienceX-rayChemistryOpticsPhysicsMineralogyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Implementing a newly developed spectrometer for the soft x‐ray range of (35–130) eV based on reflection zone plates was successfully accomplished on an electron probe microanalyzer. In this context, we present the first spectra acquired using this setup, including those of elements such as Be (Kα), C (Kα), Mg (L 2,3 ), Al (L 2,3 ), and Si (L 2,3 ). We have also conducted an analysis of several lithium compounds and measured the emission of Li Kα from metallic Li, LiF, and LiNbO 3 . Some of the results were compared with density functional theory calculations. The spectrum obtained for the lithium‐bearing mineral amblygonite Li 0.75 Na 0.25 Al(PO 4 )F 0.75 (OH) 0.25 is chosen to discuss some of the challenges faced.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueX-Ray SpectrometrySame topicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207