Updates of CORESTA Recommended Methods after Further Collaborative Studies Carried Out under Both ISO and Health Canada Intense Smoking Regimes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During 2012, three CORESTA Recommended Methods (CRMs) (1-3) were updated to include smoke yield and variability data under both ISO (4) and the Canadian Intense (CI) (5) smoking regimes. At that time, repeatability and reproducibility data under the CI regime on smoke analytes other than “tar”, nicotine and carbon monoxide (6) and tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) (7) were not available in the public literature. The subsequent work involved the determination of the mainstream smoke yields of benzo[a]-pyrene, selected volatiles (benzene, toluene, 1,3-butadiene, isoprene, acrylonitrile), and selected carbonyls (acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, propionaldehyde, butyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde, acrolein, acetone and 2-butanone) in ten cigarette products followed by statistical analyses according to the ISO protocol (8). This paper provides some additional perspective on the data variability under the ISO and CI smoking regimes not given in the CRMs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.091 | 0.122 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".