About the COA interpretation category

Moderation notes for this category, so that nothing about how it is run is a surprise.

Topics get moved into and out of here regularly. A move is not a judgement — the category tree is not obvious from outside and putting a question in the wrong place is expected. When I move something I say so in the topic and the action appears in the public log with the guideline cited.

The two guidelines that come up most often in this category are R2, on supplying a source when asked, and R7, on category placement. Neither is used punitively.

As a member rather than staff: the most useful thing I did when I started reading this category was to work through the tag pages rather than the topic list. The topic list shows you what is recent. The tags show you what is settled.

Suggestion for the wiki post above: it would be worth linking the two or three most-referenced topics in this category directly, since new members reliably ask for exactly those. Happy to make the edit myself if nobody objects, with a revision note.

Grateful for the specificity. Vague answers to this question are what sent me looking.

Picking up post #3: that is the part I would want checked first.

The distinction between release testing and characterisation is one industrial documents make and retail ones usually do not. It is the difference between "we tested every lot for this" and "we established this once".

Coming back to post #3, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

An itemised related-substances table with retention times says considerably more about the synthesis than a single total. A total tells you how much is not the main peak and nothing about what it is.

Written in the hope of being told what I have missed.

A chromatogram supplied as a small image is legible for peak shape and not for baseline detail. That is enough to sanity-check an integration and not enough to reproduce it.

The variance between people here is larger than the effect being discussed.

The distinction between release testing and characterisation is one industrial documents make and retail ones usually do not. It is the difference between "we tested every lot for this" and "we established this once".

Worth saying I have only my own numbers here, and n is small.

An itemised related-substances table with retention times says considerably more about the synthesis than a single total. A total tells you how much is not the main peak and nothing about what it is.

I read post #7 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

A chromatogram supplied as a small image is legible for peak shape and not for baseline detail. That is enough to sanity-check an integration and not enough to reproduce it.

Post #11 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

The distinction between release testing and characterisation is one industrial documents make and retail ones usually do not. It is the difference between "we tested every lot for this" and "we established this once".

An itemised related-substances table with retention times says considerably more about the synthesis than a single total. A total tells you how much is not the main peak and nothing about what it is.

Noting that I have skin in this question and have tried to discount for it.