Sunscreen <i>in vitro</i> spectroscopy: application to UVA protection assessment and correlation with <i>in vivo</i> persistent pigment darkening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, we have described an in vitro spectroscopic method to evaluate the sunscreen products for UVA sun protection factor. The roughened PMMA plates have been used as a transparent substrate on to which the test product is spread. The UVA protection factors have been deduced from the UV-transmittance data measured in the UVA area. In order to be as close as possible to the in vivo protection factors, issued from the PPD end-point, the treated polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) plates are submitted to different UV-irradiation doses, before the measurement. The correlation in vitro/in vivo is poor when the sunscreens are not irradiated. A UV dose of about 2 minimal pigmenting dose (MPD) is enough to achieve a good correlation between in vitro and in vivo data issued from the 13 tested sunscreens. These results are consistent with the fact that the photostability of sunscreens is challenged during an in vivo PPD test.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".