MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037707616 · doi:10.1080/15287390801997732

Air Pollution and Public Health: A Guidance Document for Risk Managers

2008· review· en· W2037707616 on OpenAlexaff
Lorraine Craig, Jeffrey R. Brook, Q. Chiotti, Bart E. Croes, Stephanie Gower, A. J. Hedley, Daniel Krewski, Alan Krupnick, Michał Krzyżanowski, Michael D. Moran, William T. Pennell, Jonathan M. Samet, Jürgen E. Schneider, John Shortreed, M. L. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaToronto Public HealthEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir quality indexScope (computer science)Political scienceAir pollutionEnvironmental planningPublic healthPublic relationsBusinessLibrary scienceMedicineGeographyComputer scienceMeteorologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This guidance document is a reference for air quality policymakers and managers providing state-of-the-art, evidence-based information on key determinants of air quality management decisions. The document reflects the findings of five annual meetings of the NERAM (Network for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management) International Colloquium Series on Air Quality Management (2001-2006), as well as the results of supporting international research. The topics covered in the guidance document reflect critical science and policy aspects of air quality risk management including i) health effects, ii) air quality emissions, measurement and modeling, iii) air quality management interventions, and iv) clean air policy challenges and opportunities.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0100.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.012

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations148
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental HealthSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207