Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,091

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Recommendations for the definition, estimation and use of the detection limit

·1987·The Analyst

Abstract

The detection limit is an important concept in trace analysis. However, analysts have been slow to adopt the IUPAC definition of detection limit, and as a consequence there is still a variety of usages in the current literature. The different usages can be reconciled by a proper specification of the analytical system in which the detection limit is measured. Because detection limit cannot be rigorously interpreted in terms of confidence intervals, there is little point in determining it with great precision. Nevertheless, when it is estimated by an appropriate means, it is an invaluable characteristic of an analytical system.

Overview

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 · 10.1039/an9871200199

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

Metadata

Venue
The Analyst
Published
1987
Volume
112
Issue
2
Pages
199
ISSN
  • 0003-2654 (ISSN-L)
  • 1364-5528
OpenAlex
W4229676862
Cited by
1,091
References
0
FWCI
4.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Recommendations for the definition, estimation and use of the detection limit. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/an9871200199
The paper
Recommendations for the definition, estimation and use of the detection limit. (1987). The Analyst. https://doi.org/10.1039/an9871200199

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.