PreprintCited by 131Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils

Full propagation of analytical uncertainties in Δ47 measurements

Open access
Daëron, Mathieu·2020·Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems

Preprint — published as 10.1029/2020gc009592

Abstract

Clumped-isotope measurements in CO2 and carbonates (Δ47) present a number of technical challenges and require correcting for various sources of analytical non-linearity. For now we lack a formal description of the analytical errors associated with these correction steps, which are not accounted for in most data processing methods currently in use. Here we formulate a quantitative description of Δ47 error propagation, fully taking into account standardization errors and their properties. We describe various standardization strategies, along with the assumptions they rely on, in the context of this model, and propose a new, “pooled” standardization approach designed to yield more robust/accurate corrections. User-friendly online resources and an open-source Python library are also provided to facilitate the use of these error models. Among other uses, the mathematical framework described here may be helpful to improve standardization protocols (e.g., anchor/unknown ratios) and inform future efforts to define community reference materials.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/essoar.10505298.1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Daëron, M.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Daëron, Mathieu
Venue
Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-12-10
Volume
22
Issue
5
ISSN
1525-2027 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3137845640
Cited by
131
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 1
FWCI
11.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-17-CE01-0004)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (016.161.365)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Keywords
clumped isotopes, Δ47, error propagation, analytical uncertainty, carbon dioxide, carbonates, reference materials

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review