Toxicity of Flare and Crude Hydrocarbon Mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The toxicity of whole, saturate, and aromatic hydrocarbon mixtures from flare pit and crude oil sources were evaluated using Lumbricus terrestris. Body burden analysis was used to analyze the intrinsic toxicity of the six hydrocarbon mixtures. The major fractions of the whole mixtures, the saturate, and aromatic fractions had different intrinsic toxicities; the aromatics were more toxic than the saturates. The toxicity of the saturate and aromatic fractions also differed between the mixtures. The flare saturate mixture was more toxic than the crude saturate mixture, while the crude aromatic mixture was more toxic than the flare aromatic mixture. The most dramatic difference in toxicity of the two sources was between the flare whole and crude whole mixtures. The crude whole mixture was very toxic; the toxicity of this mixture reflected the toxicity of the crude aromatic fraction. However, the flare whole mixture was not toxic, due to a lack of partitioning from the whole mixture into the lipid membrane of the exposed worms. This lack of partitioning appears to be related to the relatively high concentrations of asphaltenes and polar compounds in the flare pit whole mixture.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.006 | 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".