MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772483884 · doi:10.1080/10962247.2017.1405096

Ambient fine particulate matter in China: Its negative impacts and possible countermeasures

2017· review· en· W2772483884 on OpenAlexafffund
Zihan Qi, Tingjia Chen, Jiang Chen, Xiaofei Qi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSoochow UniversityUniversity of TorontoGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsParticulatesBeijingEnvironmental scienceChinaNatural resource economicsEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental protectionGeographyEconomicsEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent decades, China has experienced rapid economic development accompanied by increasing concentrations of ambient PM2.5, particulate matter of less than 2.5 μm in diameter. PM2.5 is now believed to be a carcinogen, causing higher lung cancer risks and generating losses to the economy and society. This meta-analysis evaluates the losses generated by ambient PM2.5 in Suzhou from 2014 to 2016 and predicts losses at different concentrations. Estimations of total losses in Beijing, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Guangzhou, Dalian, and Xiamen are also presented, with a total national loss in 2015. The authors then demonstrate that lowering ambient PM2.5 concentrations would be a realistic way for China to reduce the evaluated social losses in the short term. Possible legal measures are listed for lowering ambient PM2.5 concentrations.Implications: The present findings quantify the economic effects of ambient PM2.5 due to the increased incidence rate and mortality rate of lung cancer. Lowering ambient PM2.5 concentrations would be the most realistic way for China to reduce tghe evaluated social losses in the short term. Possible legal measures for lowering ambient PM2.5 concentrations to reduce the total losses are identified.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Air & Waste Management AssociationSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207