MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of Benzo[a]pyrene Relative Abundance Ratios to Assess Exposure to Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Ambient Atmosphere in the Vicinity of a Söderberg Aluminum Smelter

2000· article· en· W2022566406 on OpenAlexaff
Eric G. Sanderson, Jean-Pierre Farant

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental chemistryPyreneAtmosphere (unit)ChemistryBenzo(a)pyreneParticulatesPersistent organic pollutantNaphthaleneAir pollutionStack (abstract data type)AluminiumDeposition (geology)HydrocarbonAluminium smeltingEnvironmental scienceOrganic chemistryMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) relative abundance ratios (RARs) to assess exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the urban atmospheric air in the vicinity of a horizontal stud Söderberg aluminum reduction facility. The B[a]P RARs refer to the concentration of individual PAHs measured in a given sample divided by the concentration of B[a]P found in the same sample. This study compared the B[a]P RARs calculated for the facility stack and three sites near the Söderberg aluminum smelter for three different sampling periods. Interperiod differences were significant for many of the PAHs, and the differences between the stations proved insignificant at p < 0.05. The differences between each individual station and the facility stack were significant for all PAHs. B[a]P RARs increased in value at the stations compared with the stack, indicating that B[a]P may be degraded or removed from the atmosphere at a rate greater than that of the majority of the measured PAHs. It is concluded that B[a]P and B[a]P RARs may be poor markers of exposure to PAHs in the vicinity of this Söderberg aluminum refinery for the entire mixture of PAHs present in the ambient atmosphere.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations18
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Air & Waste Management AssociationSame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207