K162399 · Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc. · JGJ · Jan 19, 2017 · Clinical Chemistry
Device Facts
Record ID
K162399
Device Name
Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg)
Applicant
Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc.
Product Code
JGJ · Clinical Chemistry
Decision Date
Jan 19, 2017
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 862.1495
Device Class
Class 1
Attributes
Real-World Evidence
Real-World Evidence
Submission
Device
Sponsor
RWD Sources
RWE Use Summary
Key Tags
K162399 · Jan 19, 2017
Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg)
Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc.
Remnant de-identified clinical patient samples
Remnant clinical samples were used in a method comparison study to evaluate the performance of the Atellica CH Magnesium assay against the predicate device (Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge).
Method comparison study using remnant de-identified clinical samples
Clinical patient samples (serum, urine, and lithium heparin plasma); Sample Size: 108 (serum), 100 (urine), 109 (lithium heparin plasma); Number of Sites: 1 (Internal Siemens R&D laboratory)
Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge
Correlation and agreement between the new device and the predicate device
Indications for Use
The Atellica™ CH Magnesium (Mg) assay is for in vitro diagnostic use in the quantitative determination of magnesium in human serum, plasma (lithium heparin), and urine using the Atellica™ CH Analyzer. Magnesium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypomagnesemia (abnormally low levels of magnesium) and hypermagnesemia (abnormally high levels of magnesium).
Device Story
Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) is a quantitative, photometric in vitro diagnostic assay for use on the Atellica CH Analyzer. The device processes human serum, lithium heparin plasma, or urine samples. It utilizes a modified xylidyl blue reaction in an alkaline medium where magnesium ions form a water-soluble purple-red complex; calcium is excluded via EGTA complexing. The increase in absorbance at 505/694 nm is measured, with the signal intensity proportional to magnesium concentration. The assay is intended for professional use in clinical laboratory settings. Healthcare providers use the resulting quantitative magnesium values to diagnose and manage patients with abnormal magnesium levels (hypomagnesemia or hypermagnesemia).
Clinical Evidence
No clinical data. Performance was established via bench testing, including precision (CLSI EP05-A3), linearity (CLSI EP06-A), detection limits (CLSI EP17-A2), and interference studies (CLSI EP07-A2). Method comparison against the predicate device (Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge) showed high correlation (r ≥ 0.996) across serum, plasma, and urine samples. Reference intervals were verified using 20 healthy adults per CLSI EP28-A3.
Technological Characteristics
Quantitative photometric assay using modified xylidyl blue reaction. Reagents are liquid-packaged in two-well packs. Sensing principle: absorbance measurement at 505/694 nm. Measuring range: 0.50–5.00 mg/dL (serum/plasma) and 1.00–14.00 mg/dL (urine). Connectivity: integrated with Atellica CH Analyzer. Storage: 2–8°C.
Indications for Use
Indicated for the quantitative determination of magnesium in human serum, plasma (lithium heparin), and urine to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of hypomagnesemia and hypermagnesemia in patients requiring clinical chemistry assessment.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A magnesium test system is a device intended to measure magnesium levels in serum and plasma. Magnesium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypomagnesemia (abnormally low plasma levels of magnesium) and hypermagnesemia (abnormally high plasma levels of magnesium).
{0}
1
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION
DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k162399
B. Purpose for Submission:
New Device
C. Measurand:
Magnesium
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative, photometric assay
E. Applicant:
Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg)
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
CFR 862.1495, Magnesium test system
2. Classification:
Class I, reserved
3. Product code:
JGJ
{1}
4. Panel:
Clinical Chemistry
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See Indications for use below.
2. Indication(s) for use:
The Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) assay is for in vitro diagnostic use in the quantitative determination of magnesium in human serum, plasma (lithium heparin), and urine using the Atellica CH Analyzer. Magnesium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypomagnesemia (abnormally low levels of magnesium) and hypermagnesemia (abnormally high levels of magnesium).
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For in vitro diagnostic use.
For Professional use.
4. Special instrument requirements:
Atellica CH Analyzer
I. Device Description:
The Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) reagents are liquid packaged in two separate reagent packs with two wells each. The saleable package contains 3 of each of the 2 packs described. These packs include a preserved Tris buffer and a preserved Xylidyl blue (0.84 mmol/L) reagent.
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k861700
{2}
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Candidate Device Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) | Predicate Device Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge (k861700) |
| Intended Use | The Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) assay is for in vitro diagnostic use in the quantitative determination of magnesium | Same |
| Sample Type | Serum, Lithium Heparin plasma, and urine | Same |
| Expected Values | Urine : 24-255 mg/24 hr | Urine: Same |
| Traceability | NIST SRM 929 | Same |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Candidate Device Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) | Predicate Device Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge (k861700) |
| Device Technology | Xylidyl blue reaction | Methylthymol blue (MTB) complexometric procedure |
| Expected Values | Serum/plasma 1.60 to 2.60 mg/dL | Serum/Plasma 1.8 – 2.4 mg/dL |
| Calibration Frequency | 60 Days | 90 Days |
| Analytical Measuring Interval | Serum/Plasma: 0.50 to 5.00 mg/dL | Serum/Plasma: 0.0 – 20.0 mg/dL |
| | Urine: 1.00 to 14.00 mg/dL | Urine: 0.0 – 20.0 mg/dL |
K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
- CLSI Guideline, EP07-A2 (7-127): Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline
- CLSI Guideline, EP09-A3 (7-245): Measurement Procedure Comparison And Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline - Third Edition
- CLSI Guideline, EP05-A3 (7-251): Evaluation of Precision Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods: Approved Guideline
- CLSI Guideline, EP06-A (7- 93): Evaluation of the Linearity Of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline
- CLSI Guideline, EP17-A2 (7-233): Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures
- CLSI Guideline, 25-A (7-235): Evaluation of Stability of In Vitro Diagnostic
{3}
Reagents; Approved Guideline
- CLSI Guideline, EP28-A3 (7-224): Defining, Establishing, And Verifying Reference Intervals In The Clinical Laboratory; Approved Guideline- Third Edition
# L. Test Principle:
The Atellica CH Mg assay is based on the modified xylidyl blue reaction. The reagent was modified to eliminate the use of organic solvents. Magnesium ions react with xylidyl blue in an alkaline medium to form a water-soluble purple-red complex. The increase in absorbance of xylidyl blue at $505 / 694\mathrm{nm}$ is proportional to the concentration of magnesium in the sample. Calcium is excluded from the reaction by complexing with EGTA.
# M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
# 1. Analytical performance:
# a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Precision testing was performed in accordance with CLSI EP05-A3. Precision was tested in 2 replicates per run, two runs per day for 20 days for a total of 80 results with controls, serum and lithium-heparin plasma pools on one instrument. The data are summarized in the following table.
| Sample Type | N | Mean mg/dL | Within Run | | Within-Lab Precision | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD, mg/dL | %CV | SD, mg/dL | %CV |
| Serum | 80 | 0.78 | 0.23 | 3.0 | 0.31 | 3.9 |
| Plasma | 80 | 1.51 | 0.034 | 2.3 | 0.051 | 3.4 |
| Serum QC | 80 | 2.53 | 0.044 | 1.7 | 0.050 | 2.0 |
| Serum | 80 | 4.22 | 0.024 | 0.6 | 0.0477 | 1.1 |
| Urine QC1 | 80 | 4.61 | 0.047 | 0.8 | 0.097 | 2.1 |
| Urine QC2 | 80 | 11.19 | 0.108 | 1.0 | 0.141 | 1.3 |
# b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
Linearity was evaluated with 10 samples which spanned the assay measuring interval for serum specimens (0.42-5.61 mg/dL) and 10 samples which spanned the assay measuring interval for urine specimens (0.65-16.08 mg/dL). Each was prepared by mixing high and low concentration samples across the measurement interval as described in CLSI EP06-A. The high sample was prepared by spiking native serum or urine pools with magnesium acetate. Low pools were created by diluting serum and urine samples with saline solution. Four replicates were measured for each sample. The mean of these replicates was used for the regression analysis, as summarized below.
{4}
| Sample Type | Serum | Urine |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Linear regression equation | 0.999x - 0.022 | Y = 1.001x + 0.020 |
| Correlation Coefficient (r) | 0.999 | 1.000 |
| Mean values of samples tested: | 0.42, 0.75, 1.07, 1.72, 2.37, 3.02, 3.67, 4.32, 4.96, 5.61 | 0.65, 1.61, 2.58, 4.51, 6.43, 8.36, 10.29, 12.22, 14.15, 16.08 |
This study demonstrated linearity across the claimed measuring ranges: 0.50 to $5.00\mathrm{mg / dL}$ for serum and plasma specimens and 1.00 to $14.00\mathrm{mg / dL}$ for urine specimens.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Traceability:
The Atellica CH Magnesium calibrators were previously cleared in k050374 and are traceable to the Atomic Absorption reference method, which is calibrated with NIST SRM 929 reference material.
Stability:
Real time stability protocols and acceptance criteria for the Atellica CH Magnesium reagents were reviewed and appear to support a closed vial storage claim of 12 months at $2 - 8\mathrm{C}^{\circ}$ and an onboard shelf life claim of 14 days at $2 - 8\mathrm{C}^{\circ}$ . Stability studies are ongoing.
d. Detection limit:
The Limit of Blank (LoB), Limit of Detection (LoD), and Limit of Quantitation (LoQ) were evaluated in accordance with CLSI EP17-A2. Studies were performed in the following manner.
To calculate the Limit of Blank (LoB), four samples with no analyte were measured in replicates of five for three days using three reagent lots. To estimate the Limit of Detection (LoD), four samples containing low levels of magnesium were measured in replicates of five for three days using three reagent lots. To estimate the Limit of Quantitation (LoQ), four samples containing low levels of magnesium were measured in replicates of five for three days using three reagent lots on one instrument.
The detection limit study results are summarized below:
| Sample Type | Serum, mg/dL | Urine, mg/dL |
| --- | --- | --- |
| LoB | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| LoD | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| LoQ | 0.46 | 0.57 |
{5}
The detection limit studies support the claimed measuring range of $0.50 - 5.0$ mg/dL for serum and plasma samples, and $1.00 - 14.0$ mg/dL for urine samples.
# e. Analytical specificity:
The Atellica CH Magnesium (Mg) reagent cartridge was evaluated for interferences according to CLSI EP7-A2. Potential interfering compounds were spiked into fresh serum or urine sample pools containing either low or high levels of magnesium. Bias was defined as the difference in the results between the control sample (without the interferent) and the test sample (contains the interferent) expressed in percent. The sponsor considered interference as bias exceeding $10\%$ .
The highest concentration of substances tested that did not cause significant interference is summarized in the tables below:
Interference Testing for Serum:
| Substance | Highest concentration tested that did not show significant interference |
| --- | --- |
| Hemoglobin | 500 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin, conjugated | 30 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin, unconjugated | 30 mg/dL |
| Lipemia (Intralipid®) | 500 mg/dL |
| EDTA | 12.5 mg/dL |
| Copper | 0.50 mg/dL |
| Calcium | 20 mg/dL |
| Iron | 0.50 mg/dL |
| Zinc | 0.25 mg/dL |
| Acetaminophen | 200 mg/dL |
| Ibuprofen | 500 mg/dL |
Interference Testing for Urine:
| Substance | Highest concentration tested that did not show significant interference |
| --- | --- |
| 6 N HCl | 0.01% HCl |
| Ascorbate | 50 mg/dL |
| Hemoglobin | 150 mg/dL |
| Calcium | 20 mg/dL |
| Conjugated Bilirubin | 30 mg/dL |
| Unconjugated Bilirubin | 15 mg/dL |
| Copper | 0.5 mg/dL |
| Iron | 0.5 mg/dL |
| Zinc | 0.25 mg/dL |
The sponsor has stated the following limitations in the labeling:
{6}
7
- Do not use hemolyzed samples. Because Mg concentrations are 3 times higher in red blood cells than in serum, hemolyzed samples may give spuriously elevated magnesium results. Bias from hemolysis may vary due to individual sample variations in intracellular magnesium.
- Hemoglobin concentrations above 500 mg/dL may result in a positive bias in serum/plasma specimens. Hemoglobin at 750 mg/dL increases the magnesium result in serum/plasma at 1.60 mg/dL by 13%.
- Unconjugated bilirubin concentrations above 15 mg/dL may result in a positive bias in urine specimens. Unconjugated bilirubin at 30 mg/dL increases the magnesium result in urine at 2.00 mg/dL by 11%.
- EDTA concentrations above 12.5 mg/dL may result in a negative bias in serum/plasma specimens. EDTA at 25 mg/dL decreases the magnesium result in serum/plasma at 1.60 mg/dL and 2.60 mg/dL by -15%.
- Zinc concentrations above 0.25 mg/dL may result in a positive bias in serum/plasma specimens. Zinc at 0.5 mg/dL increases the magnesium result in serum/plasma at 1.60 mg/dL by 19%. Zinc at 0.5 mg/dL increases the magnesium result in serum/plasma at 2.60 mg/dL by 14%.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
The comparator device selected for the method comparison study was the Dimension Magnesium Flex Reagent Cartridge. Serum, lithium heparin plasma, and urine samples were tested. The study included native and diluted samples spanning the claimed assay intervals. For serum, 8 samples were diluted and the remainder were native. For lithium heparin plasma, 8 samples were diluted and the remainder were native. For urine, no samples were diluted; all were native. For all tests, native samples made up more than 90% of the sample pool.
The results across the full assay intervals were analyzed using Deming regression. One replicate of each sample was tested and used in the analysis.
| Specimen Type | N | R | Regression Equation | Sample Range Dimension Magnesium Flex (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum | 108 | 0.996 | Y = 0.94x + 0.09 | 0.48-5.16 |
| Lithium Heparin Plasma | 109 | 0.998 | Y = 0.97x + 0.09 | 0.50-5.05 |
| Urine | 100 | 0.998 | Y = 0.96x - 0.06 | 1.10-13.22 |
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable. Please see sections M.1.a, M.1.b, M.1.d, M.1.e, and M.1.2.a, demonstrating the performance of the claimed sample types (serum, lithium
{7}
heparin plasma, and urine) for this device.
3. Clinical studies:
Not Applicable.
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
Reference intervals are based on literature (see table below). In addition, the reference intervals were verified using 20 healthy adults on the Atellica CH Analyzer in accordance with CLSI Document EP28-A3c. As with all in vitro diagnostic assays, each laboratory should determine its own reference interval for the diagnostic evaluation of patient results. Consider these values as guidance only.
| Group | Specimen type | Reference Interval common unit (SI unit) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Adults | Serum/plasma^{1} | 1.6 - 2.6 mg/dL (0.66 to 1.07 mmol/L) |
| Adults | Urine^{2} | 24 - 255 mg/24 hour (0.99 - 10.45 mmol/24 hour) |
1. Wu AHB. Tietz Clinical Guide to Laboratory Tests. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Co; 2006:706.
2. Pesce, A.J. and Kaplan, L.A., Methods in Clinical Chemistry, C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1987.
## N. Proposed Labeling:
The labeling is sufficient and it satisfies the requirements of 21 CFR Part 809.10.
## O. Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
Predicate graph will load when search results are available.
Embedding visualization will load when search results are available.
PDF viewer will load when search results are available.
Loading panels...
Select an item from Submissions
Click any panel, subpart, regulation, product code, or device to see details here.
Section Matches
Results will appear here.
Product Code Matches
Results will appear here.
Special Control Matches
Results will appear here.
Loading collections...
Loading
My Alerts
You will receive email notifications based on the filters and frequency you set for each alert.
Sort by:
Create Alert
Search Filters
Agent Token
Create a read-only bearer token for Claude, ChatGPT, or other agents that can call HTTP APIs.
Copy this now. It will not be shown again.
Connected apps
Apps you authorized through browser sign-in. Disconnecting revokes their access immediately.
Learn the FDA Browser
Two short videos show you everything — or skip straight to the written tutorial if you'd rather read. You can reopen this any time from the Tutorial button in the top bar.
Part 1 — Search, results, and everyday workflows 16 min
Part 2 — Embeddings: the galaxy map 3 min
1. Search: exact and fuzzy
Type a phrase like "coronary artery calcification" into the search box. You get two kinds of results. Exact results match the literal phrase — prefix searches work ("coronary artery calcificati") but suffix searches do not. Fuzzy results match on the meaning and intent of your phrase rather than the exact words, and are sorted by relevance score. Hover over the Exact or Fuzzy badge on any row to see exactly why it matched.
Use the checkboxes above the results to narrow: SaMD keeps only software-only devices, AI / ML keeps only devices with AI.
Exact vs. fuzzy search: what's the difference?
Exact matches on the literal phrase (prefix search works, suffix does not). Fuzzy matches on the meaning and intent of the phrase rather than the exact words. Hover over the badge on any row to see why it matched.
You search "coronary artery calcification" and want only software devices with AI. What two filters do you apply?
Narrow by SaMD (software-only devices), then narrow by AI/ML (devices with AI).
2. The results table
Scroll right in the results table. The intended use is extracted for you — no need to open the PDF. The device story gives a high-level snapshot of what the device does and how it's used. The AI Performance sub-table shows each output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, and development/test dataset descriptions — the same format Innolitics uses for regulatory strategy outputs, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. It is AI-generated but has been very reliable in practice.
Where do you find a device's intended use without opening the PDF?
Scroll right in the search results table. The intended use column is extracted for you; no need to dig into the 510(k) summary PDF.
What does the AI Performance sub-table show, and why is it useful?
Output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, development dataset description, and test dataset description. It's the same format we use for regulatory strategy output and Fast 510(k) input, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. AI-generated but reliable in practice.
3. Judging fuzzy relevance
Fuzzy results trail off in relevance as you scroll. Use three signals to decide how far down to go: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether your target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, you're past the relevant zone. A top hit with a low score (~0.4) and a stretched explanation is a hint the closest predicates are far away — the project may be headed for De Novo. Note the fuzzy search is a pattern match: it doesn't handle negation ("not") well, and hardware devices can appear — filter by SaMD/AI ML to cut them.
How do you judge how far down fuzzy search results to go?
Use the relevancy signals: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether the target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, results are trailing off in relevancy.
4. Device detail page: chat and citations
Click a device name to open its detail page: device facts on the left, a chat window on the right. Ask something like "Describe the training data". The answer carries little citation bubbles — click one to jump to the highlighted passage in the source PDF, so you can verify every AI answer against the document. There's also a Download PDF button for sharing.
How do you verify an AI chat answer on the device detail page?
Click the citation bubbles to jump to the relevant highlight in the source document.
Reading rule for every project: how many summaries do you read in full?
At least the three most relevant 510(k) or De Novo summaries, in full. After that, use targeted chat questions to confirm your memory quickly. The tool supports this professional habit — it doesn't replace it.
5. Side-by-side comparison
Select multiple rows in the results table (aim for under ~10), then open the PDF Viewer tab. Ask one question — it goes to all selected devices in parallel, each with citations. This is the fastest way to compare and contrast devices: training data, PCCP scope, how they handled adding new scanners, and so on.
What does the side-by-side PDF viewer mode do?
Select multiple devices, open the PDF viewer tab, and ask one question (e.g., "Describe the training data"). It queries all selected devices simultaneously with citations, so you can compare and contrast quickly.
6. Collections
With rows selected, go to the Collections tab and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). Reload that selection any time — before a client call, pull up the collection and ask questions across all of its devices at once.
How do you save a set of selected devices for later use?
Select the rows, go to the Collections tab, and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). You can reload the selection anytime and carry it into the PDF viewer and other tabs that support selections.
7. Product codes and the regulations tree
Click a product code in the results to jump to it in the regulations tree — identification text, sibling product codes, and devices you can open in a PDF viewer on the right. Click a regulation number to see its identification, special controls, and related product codes. You can also search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree. Always read the special controls if any exist for your device — it broadens your search and sharpens pre-kickoff research.
What can you do from the regulations tree view?
Browse product codes and regulation numbers, read the identification text and special controls, browse sibling product codes, open device PDFs on the right, and search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree.
8. Chart view
Click Show Chart and segment by regulation number (or product code) to see which regulations dominate your result set. Clicking a regulation takes you into the regulations tree. Great for spotting that most matches are, say, hardware laparoscopic devices — a cue to go back and filter.
How do you see which regulations dominate a search result set?
Click "Show Chart" and segment by Regulation Number. Clicking a regulation takes you to the regulations tree.
9. The predicate graph
Open the Predicates tab for a family-tree view of predicate relationships. Click a node to trace its parents and children; selections from search carry over pre-selected. Commonly predicated devices are worth reading — a lot of people predicated them for a reason. The visual lineage is also handy on client calls, e.g. to show how a predicate family evolved and justify why your predicate still holds.
In the predicate graph, why are commonly predicated devices worth reading?
A lot of people predicated them for a reason. Clicking a node traces parents and children, and selections from search carry over pre-selected.
10. Embeddings: the galaxy map
The Embeddings tab plots every matching document in a 2-D "galaxy map" where semantically similar devices cluster together. Hover or click clusters to explore, and let AI label the clusters for you. Embeddings beat product codes for grouping: two devices can carry different product codes (LLZ vs. QIH) yet do the same thing — the embedding captures the meaning of the intended use and device story. This is also exactly how retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) works under the hood, and it makes a great visual on client calls.
Try it yourself
Head to the search page and work through a few of these AI/ML fuzzy searches to build intuition: perivascular fat on CT · aortic valve calcification opportunistic screening on noncontrast CT · breast cancer prediction on digital pathology slides · autism detection · gestational age prediction · a hearing aid that can also detect a pulse · foundation model based analysis of ECG · large language models · penetration test. Watch how the relevance scores, intended use, and AI Performance tables tell you when results stop being meaningful.