Quantitative Analysis of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Cited by the United States Food and Drug Administration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The yields of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were determined from cigarette mainstream smoke condensate extracts using Gas Chromatography- Tandem Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS/MS). The method has been validated for ISO and Health Canada Intense (HCI) smoking protocols. Quantifiable levels (ISO means 0.16 to 365 ng/cig; HCI means 0.33 to 1595 ng/cig; n = 30) of 15 PAHs were found in the Kentucky reference cigarette K3R4F. The coefficient of variance (CV) was derived from ten determinations each run in triplicate. The CV range was 8.7% to 24.8% (ISO) and 6.6% to 24.3% (HCI). The limit of detection (LOD) based on empirical precision was ≤ 0.06 ng/cig (ISO) and ≤ 0.20 ng/cig (HCI) for all components except naphthalene (2.89 and 9.62 ng/cig, respectively). The yields from 5 unspecified branded cigarettes (Samples A-E) and 2 other reference cigarettes, K1R5F and the CORESTA monitor CM7, were determined under ISO smoking conditions. The same 15 PAHs were detected as in the K3R4F; however, cigarettes with lower yields of total particulate matter (TPM) were found to contain significantly less PAHs. One component was measured below the limit of quantification (LOQ) in Sample E and 2 components were < LOQ in the K1R5F.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".