MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774278575 · doi:10.1089/ees.2017.0380

Methods of Responsibly Managing End-of-Life Foams and Plastics Containing Flame Retardants: Part II

2017· review· en· W2774278575 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Engineering Science · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsFire retardantWaste managementPlastic wasteEnvironmental scienceBrominated flame retardantMaterials scienceForensic engineeringEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is Part II of a review covering the wide range of issues associated with all aspects of the use and responsible disposal of foam and plastic wastes containing toxic or potentially toxic flame retardants. We identify basic and applied research needs in the areas of responsible collection, pretreatment, processing, and management of these wastes. In Part II, we explore alternative technologies for the management of halogenated flame retardant (HFR) containing wastes, including chemical, mechanical, and thermal processes for recycling, treatment, and disposal.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.284 · 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