Examination of Some Performance Characteristics of Breath Alcohol Measurements Obtained with the Intoxilyzer(R) 8000C Following Social Drinking Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Intoxilyzer 8000C was used to measure breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) in 10 healthy subjects under social drinking conditions. Measurements commenced within 5 min of the end of drinking (EOD). For 14 blood-breath pairs, measured BrACs were compared to corresponding venous blood alcohol concentrations (vBAC) of samples drawn at least 30 min after EOD and within 5 min of the corresponding breath test. BAC was analyzed using an enzymatic method. Concentration differences between breath and blood (BrAC - vBAC) ranged from -32 to +3 mg/dL (untruncated BrAC) and from -32 to -4 mg/dL (truncated BrAC). The Invalid Sample message was actuated in five out of 23 BrAC profiles. In the remaining 18 samples, residual mouth alcohol was evaluated by comparing the maximum difference between successive (5 min apart) measurements (MID5) over 20-30 min after EOD with the precision of replicate BrAC values taken 30-40 min after EOD (5 mg/dL or less; precision unaffected by breath sample volume over the range of 2-3 L). MID5 values occurred within the first three measurements in 16/18 cases, indicative of a significant mouth alcohol effect. Thus, mandatory delays should be used with the Intoxilyzer 8000C prior to testing to minimize the probability of overestimation of BrAC due to mouth alcohol.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".