Stepping-up accurate quantification of chlorinated paraffins: Successful certification of the first matrix reference material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chlorinated paraffins (CPs) are industrial chemicals categorised as persistent organic pollutants because of their toxicity, persistency and tendency to long-range transport, bioaccumulation and biomagnification. Despite having been the subject of environmental attention for decades, analytical methods for CPs still struggle reaching a sufficient degree of accuracy. Among the issues negatively impacting the quantification of CPs, the unavailability of well-characterised standards, both as pure substances and as matrix (certified) reference materials (CRMs), has played a major role. The focus of this study was to provide a matrix CRM as quality control tool to improve the comparability of CPs measurement results. We present the process of certification of ERM®-CE100, the first fish reference material assigned with certified values for the mass fraction of short-chain and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs and MCCPs, respectively). The certification was performed in accordance with ISO 17034:2016 and ISO Guide 35:2017, with the value assignment step carried out via an intercomparison of laboratories of demonstrated competence in CPs analysis and applying procedures based on different analytical principles. After confirmation of the homogeneity and stability of the CRM, two certified values were assigned for SCCPs, depending on the calibrants used: 31 ± 9 μg kg-1 and 23 ± 7 μg kg-1. The MCCPs certified value was established as 44 ± 17 μg kg-1. All assigned values are relative to wet weight in the CRM that was produced as a fish paste to enhance similarity to routine biota samples. The fish tissue ERM-CE100 is the first matrix CRM commercially available for the analysis of CPs, enabling analytical laboratories to improve the accuracy and the metrological traceability of their measurements. The certified CPs values are based on results obtained by both gas and liquid chromatography coupled with various mass spectrometric techniques, offering thus a broad validity to laboratories employing different analytical methods and equipment.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
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".