MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999641084 · doi:10.1080/15287390802271616

Estimates of Percutaneous Toxicity of Sulfur Mustard Vapor Suitable for Use in Protective Equipment Standards

2008· article· en· W1999641084 on OpenAlexaff
Eva F. Gudgin Dickson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSulfur mustardToxicologySulfurClothingEnvironmental scienceToxicityChemistryBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An analysis was performed of historical human chamber data for exposure to sulfur mustard vapor, in order to correlate skin exposure dosages with effects in a manner specifically suitable for use in protective clothing standards. Data were reanalyzed to take into account (1) body region variability of skin responses to a single acute exposure to sulfur mustard vapor, (2) effect of hot/humid versus cooler exposure, and (3) influence of clothing. This approach permits deriving predicted skin responses pertinent to a protective clothing wearer, for a relatively short single acute exposure to vapor (up to a few hours) under the hot/humid conditions expected within a protective ensemble. Values for permissible dermal exposure to sulfur mustard vapor are proposed for protected emergency responders or military serving in combat theaters that may be used in standards intended to be employed in conjunction with evaluation of vapor protection provided by individual protective equipment for protection against chemical warfare agents by Man-in-Simulant vapor test methods.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.701
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental HealthSame topicPesticide Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207