MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909411690 · doi:10.1021/acs.estlett.8b00685

Indoor Lighting Releases Gas Phase Nitrogen Oxides from Indoor Painted Surfaces

2019· article· en· W2909411690 on OpenAlexaff
Heather Schwartz‐Narbonne, Stephanie H. Jones, D. J. Donaldson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsIncandescent light bulbNOxXenonIndoor air qualityGas phaseMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceNitrogenHalogen lampEnvironmental chemistryCombustionChemistryOpticsEnvironmental engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The indoor environment provides unique surfaces and lighting conditions which affect the photochemistry taking place there. As indoor illumination sources typically output wavelengths too long to affect gas phase photochemistry, the potential for surface photochemistry induced by indoor light sources has been mostly unexplored. In this proof of concept study, we report the emission of gas phase nitrogen oxides as a product of the illumination of glass surfaces coated with nitrate-doped TiO 2 and nitratedeposited on indoor paint, using a variety of common indoor light sources. Fluorescent, incandescent, halogen, and LED lights were studied, and a xenon lamp was used for baseline measurements. NO x was emitted from all samples, thus establishing that renoxification can occur in indoor environments. NO 2 (g) was the predominant species emitted from samples coated with nitrate-doped TiO 2, and NO (g) was the predominant species emitted from nitrate-deposited painted glass surfaces. It was also found that heating from the light sources had no effect on the production of NO x . This preliminary study establishes the potential for heterogeneous photochemistry to occur on real indoor surfaces and opens the way for further research to be conducted under realistic indoor conditions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations49
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology LettersSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207