Assessing the Bioavailability and Risk from Metal-Contaminated Soils and Dusts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Exposure to contaminated soil and dust is an important pathway in human health risk assessment. Physical and chemical characteristics and biological factors determine the bioaccessibility/bioavailability of soil and dust contaminants. Within a single sample, contamination may arise from multiple sources of toxic elements that may exist as different species that impact bioavailability. In turn, the bioaccessibility/bioavailability of soil and dust contaminants directly impacts human health risk. Research efforts focusing on development and application of in vitro and in vivo methods to measure the bioaccessibility/bioavailability of metal-contaminated soils have advanced in recent years. The objective of this workshop was to focus on developments in assessing the bioaccessibility/bioavailability of arsenic-contaminated soils, metals’ contamination in urban Canadian residences and potential children's exposures to toxic elements in house dust, an urban community-based study (i.e., West Oakland Residential Lead Assessment), bioavailability studies of soil cadmium, chromium, nickel, and mercury and human exposures to contaminated Brownfield soils. These presentations covered issues related to human health and bioavailability along with the most recent studies on community participation in assessing metals’ contamination, studies of exposures to residential contamination, and in vitro and in vivo methods development for assessing the bioaccessibility/bioavailability of metals in soils and dusts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".