MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980537547 · doi:10.1117/12.830360

Bioaerosols standoff detection simultaneously refereed with particle concentration (ppl) and viability units (ACPLA)

2009· article· en· W1980537547 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvie Buteau, Jean-Robert Simard, Susan Rowsell

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioaerosolIndoor bioaerosolDetection limitParticle (ecology)Materials scienceEnvironmental scienceAerosolizationKudzuAerosolChemistryMeteorologyChromatographyEnvironmental chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Defence R&D Canada (DRDC) has developed, by the end of the 90s, a standoff bioaerosol sensor prototype based on intensified range-gated spectrometric detection of Laser Induced Fluorescence (LIF) called SINBAHD. This LIDAR system was used to characterize spectrally the LIF of bioaerosol agent simulants and obscurants during 57 cross-wind open-air releases at Suffield, CAN in July 2007. An autoclave and gamma-irradiation killing procedures were performed on Bacillus subtilis var globigii (BG) samples before they were aerosolized, disseminated and spectrally characterized. Slight discrepancies were observed in the spectral characteristics of killed versus live samples but none between the two killing methodologies. Significant signature variabilities were observed from the different batches of Erwinia Herbicolas (EH). The generated cloud was simultaneously characterized in Agent Containing Particle per Liter of Air (ACPLA) by slit sampler units and in particle per litter of air (ppl) by an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS). Correlation assessment between the stand-off sensor SINBAHD and the two referee point sensors was done, allowing an estimation of SINBAHD's sensitivity in ACPLA and in ppl. For a 20-m thick cloud at a range of 990 m, a detection limit of a few tens of ACPLA and a few ACPLA were obtained for BG and EH respectively. The extracted correlation between ACPLA and ppl data for releases performed with an agricultural sprayer showed a high degree of variability: 2 to 29% and 1 to 6% of ACPLA/ppl ratio for BG and EH, respectively.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207