MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154772000 · doi:10.1093/toxsci/64.1.111

Dosimetry Modeling of Inhaled Formaldehyde: Binning Nasal Flux Predictions for Quantitative Risk Assessment

2001· article· en· W2154772000 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueToxicological Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth CanadaCOMSATS Institute of Information TechnologyAmerican Chemistry CouncilU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsFlux (metallurgy)AirflowInhalationFormaldehydeChemistryVentilation (architecture)Tidal volumeSteady state (chemistry)Nuclear medicineRespiratory systemPhysicsAnatomyBiologyMedicineMeteorologyThermodynamicsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interspecies extrapolations of tissue dose and tumor response have been a significant source of uncertainty in formaldehyde cancer risk assessment. The ability to account for species-specific variation of dose within the nasal passages would reduce this uncertainty. Three-dimensional, anatomically realistic, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models of nasal airflow and formaldehyde gas transport in the F344 rat, rhesus monkey, and human were used to predict local patterns of wall mass flux (pmol/[mm(2)-h-ppm]). The nasal surface of each species was partitioned by flux into smaller regions (flux bins), each characterized by surface area and an average flux value. Rat and monkey flux bins were predicted for steady-state inspiratory airflow rates corresponding to the estimated minute volume for each species. Human flux bins were predicted for steady-state inspiratory airflow at 7.4, 15, 18, 25.8, 31.8, and 37 l/min and were extrapolated to 46 and 50 l/min. Flux values higher than half the maximum flux value (flux median) were predicted for nearly 20% of human nasal surfaces at 15 l/min, whereas only 5% of rat and less than 1% of monkey nasal surfaces were associated with fluxes higher than flux medians at 0.576 l/min and 4.8 l/min, respectively. Human nasal flux patterns shifted distally and uptake percentage decreased as inspiratory flow rate increased. Flux binning captures anatomical effects on flux and is thereby a basis for describing the effects of anatomy and airflow on local tissue disposition and distributions of tissue response. Formaldehyde risk models that incorporate flux binning derived from anatomically realistic CFD models will have significantly reduced uncertainty compared with risk estimates based on default methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.284 · 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