Dosimetry Modeling of Inhaled Formaldehyde: Comparisons of Local Flux Predictions in the Rat, Monkey, and Human Nasal Passages
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Formaldehyde-induced nasal squamous cell carcinomas in rats and squamous metaplasia in rats and rhesus monkeys occur in specific regions of the nose with species-specific distribution patterns. Experimental approaches addressing local differences in formaldehyde uptake patterns and dose are limited by the resolution of dissection techniques used to obtain tissue samples and the rapid metabolism of absorbed formaldehyde in the nasal mucosa. Anatomically accurate, 3-dimensional computational fluid dynamics models of F344 rat, rhesus monkey, and human nasal passages were used to estimate and compare regional inhaled formaldehyde uptake patterns predicted among these species. Maximum flux values, averaged over a breath, in nonsquamous epithelium were estimated to be 2620, 4492, and 2082 pmol/(mm(2)-h-ppm) in the rat, monkey, and human respectively. Flux values predicted in sites where cell proliferation rates were measured as similar in rats and monkeys were also similar, as were fluxes predicted in a region of high tumor incidence in the rat nose and the anterior portion of the human nose. Regional formaldehyde flux estimates are directly applicable to clonal growth modeling of formaldehyde carcinogenesis to help reduce uncertainty in human cancer risk estimates.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it