Derivation of physiological inhalation rates in children, adults, and elderly based on nighttime and daytime respiratory parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The methodology developed in our previous studies ( Brochu et al. 2006a-c ) for the determination of physiological daily inhalation rates was improved by integrating into the calculation process, both nighttime and daytime respiratory parameters, namely oxygen uptake factors (H) and ventilatory equivalents (VQ). H values during fasting (0.2057±0.0018 L of O2/kcal; mean±SD) and postprandial phases (0.2059±0.0019 L of O2/kcal) as well as VQ values for subjects at rest (27.4±4.8 to 32.2±3.1, unitless) and during the aggregate daytime activities (29.9±4.2 to 33.7±7.2) were determined and combined with published doubly labeled water measurements for the calculation of daily inhalation rates in normal-weight males and females aged 0.22-96 years (n=1235). Depending upon the unit value chosen, the highest 99th percentiles for inhalation data were found in males aged 35 to <45 years (35.40 m3/day), 2.6 to <6 months (1.138 m3/kg-day), and 10 to <16.5 years (22.29 m3/m2-day). Means and percentiles expressed in m3/kg-day as well as in m3/m2-day suggest generally higher intakes of air pollutants in children than in adults and in males than in females (in g/kg-day or g/m2-day) for identical exposure concentrations and conditions. For instance, means in boys aged 2.6 to <6 months of 10.99±3.50 m3/m2-day and 0.572±0.191 m3/kg-day are 1.3- and 2.5-folds higher, respectively, than those in adult males 65?96 years old (8.42±2.13 m3/m2-day, 0.225±0.059 m3/kg-day).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".