Identity → quantitation

Knowing what it is
unlocks how much.

Most detectors give you a peak. The LUMA gives you a fingerprint too — and Beer's Law turns that identity into a number you can trust.

Medrado Michael Leal · Medrado Analytical Innovations, LLC

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com1 / 10

Detector response

A peak says how much. Not what.

In GC, the workhorses are the FID — how hot an analyte burns — and the TCD — how well it conducts heat. Both tell you something eluted, and the peak area tells you how much. Neither tells you what it is.

A number for amount — but the compound stays anonymous. You still need a standard to say what eluted, and when.

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com2 / 10

The LUMA is different

Shine light through it.

The LUMA passes VUV light through the sample. So along with the peak, every point carries an absorbance fingerprint — the 12-band pattern. That pattern maps to molecular structure. Now you know what it is.

Same chromatogram, richer data. The bands aren't 12 chromatograms — they're one structural signature per point.

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com3 / 10

Why identity matters

Identity unlocks how much.

Here's the quiet power of a fingerprint. Beer's Law says absorbance = ε · b · c. Identity hands you ε — how strongly this molecule absorbs. The cell fixes b. You measure A. Rearrange, and concentration falls right out.

A = ε · b · c

so →

c = A / (ε · b)

c — the answer
concentration — what you solve for

A — measured
the absorbance you read

ε — known
from the fingerprint / identity

b — fixed
the cell's path length

Know what it is, and how much follows — no calibration curve for that compound. An FID can't: its response isn't predictable from identity, so every compound needs its own standard. (In practice: pseudo-absolute — anchored to certified standards, not magic.)

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com4 / 10

The sensitivity lever

Longer path, stronger signal.

Send the 12 bands of light through the sample; the molecules absorb their colors. A longer cell puts more molecules in the beam, so every band absorbs more. The fingerprint keeps its shape — the whole thing just gets taller. Bigger peak, taller bands.

Honest note: the flow cell's path length is fixed — you don't tune it per run. It's why the cell is engineered the way it is, and why more path buys more sensitivity.

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com5 / 10

Why it's quantitative

Twice the sample, twice the signal.

Hold the cell fixed and change the concentration. Pack in twice the molecules and you absorb twice as much. Absorbance rises in a straight line — and the slope of that line is what we'll build on next.

Honest footnote: the straight line holds in the working range. Push the absorbance very high and it bends — so we quantify where the physics stays linear.

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com6 / 10

Response factor

Same amount, different signal.

Take two different compounds and run the same amount of each through the same cell. Same amount in — but not the same signal out. Every compound has its own absorptivity ε — its own absorbance per unit concentration — so identical amounts of different molecules absorb differently.

Divide signal by amount and you get each compound's response factor — its signal per unit. Since Area = ε·b·c, that rate is just ε·b: a fixed number for the compound. Compound A's is bigger. Now — how do you use that? →

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com7 / 10

Relative response factor

Measured against a yardstick.

A rate needs a scale. So we fix one reference compound as the yardstick — often a stable internal standard added to every run. Each analyte's factor is quoted relative to it. Take that ratio and the shared cell cancels — what's left is pure molecule.

The reference is one chosen yardstick — not a fresh pick each time, and not just a known amount of the same compound (that's plain calibration of one thing). And be honest: classically you measure this ratio from standards of each compound — relative calibration. Useful, but you still touch every compound. The real leap is next →

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com8 / 10

Not a new idea

Predictable response has precedent.

Trusting a value you didn't re-measure every run is nothing new. In 1958 Kováts gave chromatography a transferable retention index — elution referenced to n-alkanes, portable lab to lab. Effective carbon number and tabulated response factors did the same for FID quantitation. The field already runs on transferable, pre-established values.

Already proven for VUV. VUV Analytics' VGA quantifies from a library of VUV response — not a fresh curve per compound — and it's what powers their Verified Hydrocarbon Analysis, an upgraded DHA, in production. Same detector family, a similar VUV fingerprint. The LUMA makes a similar fingerprint — so similar relative response factors could potentially follow.

So the question isn't whether predictable response works — it's how you get there for the LUMA. Here's the leap →

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com9 / 10

The idea worth chasing

What if you could predict it?

Here's the leap. The RRF is ε_analyte / ε_reference — and ε lives in the spectrum. So the ratio is predictable from the molecule itself. Anchor a handful of references to pin the instrument, and the fingerprint fills in the rest — an RRF for compounds you never ran as standards.

A few anchors, not a curve per compound. That's the shift from calibrating the instrument forever to reading the molecule once.

The VGA already leans on this. The LUMA makes a similar VUV fingerprint, so a similar result could follow. Physics-anchored, pseudo-absolute, kept honest against certified standards — early, and openly under development. An idea worth chasing.

Interested in chasing it with me? info@mai-alchemy.com

mai-alchemy.cominfo@mai-alchemy.com10 / 10

Knowing what it isunlocks how much.