MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888859495 · doi:10.1038/s41370-018-0053-x

Estimating ambient-origin PM2.5 exposure for epidemiology: observations, prediction, and validation using personal sampling in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

2018· article· en· W2888859495 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin A. Miller, Elizabeth W. Spalt, Amanda J. Gassett, Cynthia L. Curl, Timothy V. Larson, Ed Avol, Ryan W. Allen, Sverre Vedal, Adam A. Szpiro, Joel D. Kaufman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceStandard deviationExposure assessmentInfiltration (HVAC)StatisticsEnvironmental epidemiologyAir pollutionEnvironmental healthAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeographyMathematicsMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.385
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.056 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exposure Science & Environmental EpidemiologySame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207