Development of the PEARLS Model (Particulate Exposure from Ambient to Regional Lung by Subgroup) and Use of Monte Carlo Simulation to Predict Internal Exposure to PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Toronto<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Air pollution is a current and growing concern for Canadians, and there is evidence that ambient levels that meet current exposure standards may be associated with mortality and morbidity in Toronto, Canada. Evaluating exposure is an important step in understanding the relationship between particulate matter (PM) exposure and health outcomes. This report describes the PEARLS model (Particulate Exposure from Ambient to Regional Lung by Subgroup), which predicts exposure distributions for 11 age-gender population subgroups in Toronto to PM2.5 (PM with a median aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microm or less) using Monte Carlo simulation techniques. The model uses physiological and activity pattern characteristics of each subgroup to determine region-specific lung exposure to PM2.5, which is defined as the mass of PM2.5 deposited per unit time to each of five lung regions (two extrathoracic, bronchial, bronchiolar, and alveolar). The modeling results predict that children, toddlers, and infants have the broadest distributions of exposure, and the greatest chance of experiencing extreme exposures in the alveolar region of the lung. Importance analysis indicates that the most influential model variables are air exchange rate into indoor environments, time spent outdoors, and time spent at high activity levels. Additionally, a "critical point" was defined and introduced to the PEARLS to investigate the effects of possible threshold-pathogenic phenomena on subgroup exposure patterns. The analysis indicates that the subgroups initially predicted to be most highly exposed were likely to have the highest proportion of their population exposed above the critical point. Substantial exposures above the critical point were predicted in all subgroups for ambient concentrations of PM2.5 commonly observed in Toronto after continuous exposure of 24 hours or more.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".