MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Roots of Innovation in Analytical Chemistry

2025· review· en· W4410396737 on OpenAlexaff
Edgar A. Arriaga, Jani C. Ingram, Charles A. Lucy, Leyte Winfield

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Analytical Chemistry · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicElectrochemical Analysis and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityHumanityNarrativeField (mathematics)SociologyArt historyEngineeringPhilosophyMathematicsArtTheologyPsychologyLiteraturePure mathematicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article profiles 11 academic analytical chemists and explores the impact of their unique backgrounds and identities on their creativity and contributions to the field. The narratives provide inspiration and a reminder of the humanity of those contributing to innovation in analytical chemistry. Arranged alphabetically by last name, these innovators are Abraham Badu-Tawiah, Karl Booksh, Luis A. Colón, Purnendu (Sandy) Dasgupta, Jani C. Ingram, Lisa M. Jones, Matthew Lockett, Shelley Minteer, Renã A.S. Robinson, Joaquín Rodríguez-López, and Isiah M. Warner.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Analytical ChemistrySame topicElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207