MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Advanced Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Workflow for High-Confidence Non-Targeted Screening of Non-Intentionally Added Substances in Recycled Plastics

2025· article· en· W4415671237 on OpenAlexaff
Conner Stultz, James F. Griffith, Julibeth M. Martínez de la Hoz, Peilin Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Measurement Science Au · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsDow Chemical (Canada)
FundersDow Chemical Company
KeywordsWorkflowMass spectrometryIdentification (biology)Gas chromatography–mass spectrometryGas chromatographyDegradation (telecommunications)Contamination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As circularity grows in the global economy, recycling has become more relevant in the plastic materials industry. Recycled plastics, sourced from various origins, can contain numerous non-intentionally added substances such as organic contaminants, polymer degradation products, and consumer residues. The confident identification of contaminants has become an important step in the quality assessment of the recycled material and the evaluation of cleaning processes. However, traditional one-dimensional gas chromatography often encounters challenges in reporting accurate results for these complex samples. In this work, we combine a cryogen-free comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatographic separation coupled with high-resolution mass spectrometry and a new confidence-level-based data reporting workflow to achieve more rigorous and higher-confidence identification of nontargeted species in recycled plastics. We propose four confidence levels, and seven confidence descriptor classifications based on mass spectral matching, retention index matching, and mass accuracy from high-resolution mass spectral data. The workflow was applied to postconsumer recycled plastics before and after the cleaning process. Higher than 70% of identifications are made with medium-to-high confidence. About 50% more peaks are separated and identified by the workflow compared to traditional one-dimensional separation without significant increase in data collection and analysis time. The workflow was validated by recycled plastics spiked with 26 known compounds of environmental relevance covering a broad range of chemical structures.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Measurement Science AuSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207