Cluster analysis of passive air sampling data based on the relative composition of persistent organic pollutants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of passive air samplers has allowed the measurement of time-integrated concentrations of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) within spatial networks on a variety of scales. Cluster analysis of POP composition may enhance the interpretation of such spatial data. Several methodological aspects of the application of cluster analysis are discussed, including the influence of a dominant pollutant, the role of PAS duplication, and comparison of regional studies. Relying on data from six regional studies in North and South America, Africa, and Asia, we illustrate here how cluster analysis can be used to extract information and gain insights into POP sources and atmospheric transport contributions. Cluster analysis allows classification of PAS samples into those with significant local source contributions and those that represent regional fingerprints. Local emissions, atmospheric transport, and seasonal cycles are identified as being among the major factors determining the variation in POP composition at many sites. By complementing cluster analysis with meteorological data such as air mass back-trajectories, terrain, as well as geographical and socio-economic aspects, a comprehensive picture of the atmospheric contamination of a region by POPs emerges.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".