MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023377202 · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2015.04.011

Characterizing the spatial distribution of ambient ultrafine particles in Toronto, Canada: A land use regression model

2015· article· en· W2023377202 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Scott Weichenthal, Keith Van Ryswyk, Alon Goldstein, Maryam Shekarrizfard, Marianne Hatzopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Pollution · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityHealth Canada
FundersHealth CanadaCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsSpatial distributionEnvironmental scienceGeographically Weighted RegressionDistribution (mathematics)GeographyRegression analysisPhysical geographyStatisticsRemote sensingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposure models are needed to evaluate the chronic health effects of ambient ultrafine particles (<0.1 μm) (UFPs). We developed a land use regression model for ambient UFPs in Toronto, Canada using mobile monitoring data collected during summer/winter 2010-2011. In total, 405 road segments were included in the analysis. The final model explained 67% of the spatial variation in mean UFPs and included terms for the logarithm of distances to highways, major roads, the central business district, Pearson airport, and bus routes as well as variables for the number of on-street trees, parks, open space, and the length of bus routes within a 100 m buffer. There was no systematic difference between measured and predicted values when the model was evaluated in an external dataset, although the R(2) value decreased (R(2) = 50%). This model will be used to evaluate the chronic health effects of UFPs using population-based cohorts in the Toronto area.

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)0.000
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 score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations126
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental PollutionSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207