MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336601757 · doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2015.09.071

A New Calculating Model for the Suitable Area of Air Cleaners Purifying Indoor Gaseous Chemical Contaminants

2015· article· en· W2336601757 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaotong Yin, Junjie Liu, Jingjing Pei, Yuefei Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsContaminationParticulatesEnvironmental scienceIndoor airEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental chemistryAir contaminationWaste managementChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suitable area is an important index when selecting air cleaners. The suitable area's models in corresponding standards in American, Canada and Japan are all set up according to the particulate matters concentration equation. The suitable area can be calculated by multiplying a coefficient with CADR. However, air cleaners are also used to remove indoor gaseous chemical contaminants. The suitable area for particulate matters may not be reasonable for gaseous chemical contaminants. A new model to calculate the suitable area for indoor gaseous chemical contaminants has been set up. Using the CADRs of six tested air cleaners on the market, we compared the suitable areas of the air cleaners in different contaminant concentration levels. The results show suitable areas for gaseous chemical contaminants are much smaller than those for particulate matters. It is of great importance to distinguish suitable areas for different contaminants and the new model has a great reference value.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia EngineeringSame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207