Quantification of Xanthates Chemisorbed on Solid Mining Wastes by Evolved Gas Analysis Hyphenation Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<title>Abstract</title> The site of a former copper mine, in the process of being decontaminated, needed to be screened for xanthates contamination. It is known that potassium amyl xanthate as well as potassium ethyl xanthate were used in flotation process as collectors during the operation of the mine. The use of common analytical methods for organic contaminants, based on solvent extraction, showed no detectable xanthates contamination. As xanthates are strongly adsorbed on some mineral surfaces in the flotation process of the mineral-rich ore, it was suspected that common analytical methods can’t be applied to such situation. Even the use of acidic media with headspace gas chromatography was not able to detect any significant volatile decomposition products from xanthate-spiked soil samples. Then, thermal decomposition of the surface-bounded contamination, followed by an analysis of the generated vapour, showed significant results. A hyphenated system, composed of a thermogravimetric analyzer, an infrared spectrophotometer and a gas phase chromatograph coupled with a mass spectrometer was ultimately considered. With this multi-instrumental system, an analytical method has been developed and it was found that the xanthate contamination was well over 1 ppm for many samples taken from the former mining site. This article will describe the analytical method that was developed on this hyphenated system to detect, quantify and identify xanthates in environmental samples.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".