MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301317158 · doi:10.1155/2006/859214

Ozone – 42 Years Later

2006· article· en· W2301317158 on OpenAlexafffund
David V. Bates

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respiratory Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersUniversity of WashingtonUniversity of British ColumbiaGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

which the present article summarizes, included the suggestion that I should select some topic that I had been interested in for most of my professional life, and follow its development to the present.I chose to talk about ozone because I do have some milestones to chart the progress of my interest, and because, as I shall show you, it is becoming more relevant, rather than less, as time goes on.I shall also provide some notes on the development of interest in the small airways of the lung; the reason for this parallel history will become evident as we come up to date.The story of the 'discovery' of ozone by Schonbein in Basel, Switzerland, in the middle of the 19th century is an interesting one.He had worked in England teaching German at a boarding school, and at that time, he met Michael Faraday.Here he must have learned that an electric spark is often followed by a curious smell; when he got back to Basel he later became a professor of chemistry and was able to show that it was ozone (O 3 ) that was being formed.He did a very thorough job of investigating the properties of this gas, and discovered that it was intensely irritant.Its bactericidal properties became the centre of attention later in the century, and WS Gilbert wrote some doggerel verse calling it "Nature's Great Cleanser".This was unearthed by Bill Linn.I believe it was the German V2 rocket program that led to the recognition of the ozone layer, starting at approximately 30,000 feet (9144 m) and rapidly increasing to a maximum at approximately 50,000 km before waning.I am not sure of the history of this, but I was first shown German data on the ozone layer on a visit to the Royal Aeronautical Establishment at Farnborough.Our research group, led by Ronald Christie at Bart's Hospital (Farnborough, United Kingdom), was one of the few research groups with an interest in the lung, and we exchanged relevant information.It was there that I learned that the foam rubber in the passenger oxygen masks in the de Havilland Comet had deteriorated rapidly, and that the Dunlop company had suggested that it must be ozone that had caused this disintegration.The 'Comet' was the first aircraft to fly routinely above 30,000 feet.We all realized that we knew nothing of the toxicity of ozone if inhaled at sea level; however, this research was made difficult by the lack of any reliable instrument to measure the gas concentration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.015

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Respiratory JournalSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207