MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407985979 · doi:10.3389/frans.2025.1512520

The variability in hydrocarbon ions (CnH−) of polymers detected by ToF-SIMS: principal component analysis on carbon density and cross-linking degree

2025· article· en· W4407985979 on OpenAlexaff
Heng‐Yong Nie

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Analytical Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIon-surface interactions and analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisDegree (music)HydrocarbonIonCarbon fibersPolymerComponent (thermodynamics)ChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Polymer chemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryThermodynamicsStatisticsPhysicsMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Negative hydrocarbon ions, C n H − (n = 1–10), are ubiquitous in time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry, but their utility may have been overlooked. Recently, however, it has been demonstrated that the ion intensity ratio between C 6 H − and C 4 H − , denoted as ρ, can differentiate the chemical structures of polymers such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polyisoprene and polystyrene, as well as depth profile the cross-linking degree of poly (methyl methacrylate). It was found that ρ increases with the carbon density of polymers. Principal component analysis (PCA), a dimensionality reduction technique, can reveal hidden data structures through exploring the relationships among the C n H − intensities for the four polymers. Assisted by the biplot approach, PCA is key to uncovering hidden data structures, from which characteristic ions may be identifiable and their relationships classifiable. The four polymers were classified by their carbon densities, which dictate the variability of C n H − intensities and are captured by the first principal component (PC1). It also became clear that PC1 is correlated with ρ. This data-driven analytical approach is imperative when differentiating chemicals with similar structures, especially when diagnostic ions are lacking. We demonstrate the usefulness of this approach by examining poly (methyl methacrylate) with different degrees of cross-linking.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.251
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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Analytical ScienceSame topicIon-surface interactions and analysisFrench-language works237,207