MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137991607 · doi:10.1089/089426803769017668

Next Generation Pharmaceutical Impactor (A New Impactor for Pharmaceutical Inhaler Testing). Part II: Archival Calibration

2003· article· en· W2137991607 on OpenAlexaff
Virgil A. Marple, Bernard A. Olson, Kumaragovindham Santhanakrishnan, Jolyon P. Mitchell, Sharon C. Murray, Buffy Hudson‐Curtis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerosol Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsTrudell Medical International (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCascade impactorCalibrationNozzleAerosolRange (aeronautics)Volumetric flow rateParticle sizeFlow (mathematics)Particle (ecology)InhalerMechanicsMaterials scienceProcess engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsGeologyComposite materialMedicineStatisticsMeteorologyChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new seven-stage cascade impactor, the Next Generation Pharmaceutical Impactor (NGI), has been developed for the pharmaceutical industry. A calibration following "good laboratory practice (GLP)" procedures has been performed on a specific archival NGI, deemed to be representative of all NGIs. Thus, this impactor had nozzle dimensions for each stage manufactured close to the middle of the tolerance band for the design specification, and therefore the average nozzle diameter was equal to the nominal value for that stage. An essential feature of the NGI is that it is designed to operate at any flow rate between 30 and 100 L/min. Thus, the calibration was made at inlet flow rates of 30, 60 and 100 L/min representing the lower bound, mid-region and upper bound of the specified range of operation for the impactor. The calibration data were then used to develop equations that predict the particle cut size for all components of the impactor at any flow rate from 30 to 100 L/min.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations146
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aerosol MedicineSame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207