MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Passive Air Sampling for Gaseous Mercury in Workplace Atmospheres and for Personal Inhalation Exposure Monitoring

2018· article· en· W2910123544 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie A. Snow, Ying Duan Lei, Frank Wania

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)InhalationEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryInhalation exposureOccupational exposureElemental mercuryAir pollutantsChemistryAir pollutionComputer scienceEnvironmental healthFlue gasMedicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inhalation exposure to gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) continues to be a concern in a number of workplaces. Examples are facilities handling mercury-containing electronic waste, such as compact fluorescent light bulbs, or so-called “gold-shops” processing the amalgams from artisanal and small-scale gold mining operations. GEM is also often present near historically mercury-contaminated sites or in dental facilities, creating the conditions for low-level, chronic inhalation exposure. Considering that inhaled GEM is readily absorbed and transferred across the blood-brain barrier, there is a need to be able to measure its air concentrations reliably and continuously. We are therefore exploring the feasibility of using a passive air sampler (PAS) recently developed for recording long term average GEM concentrations in the ambient atmosphere in the monitoring of personal GEM inhalation exposure and GEM concentrations in workplace atmospheres. This PAS is small, light, inexpensive, easy-to-operate, and requires no power. By tightly controlling sampling rates through (i) the use of a radial porous diffusive barrier, and (ii) a wind shelter, the sampler achieves high precision and accuracy. Eliminating the PAS’s wind shelter allows for its use as a wearable personal sampler, while only slightly increasing sampling rate variability. Average GEM concentrations need to be in excess of ~20 ng/m3 for the PAS to take up sufficient GEM during an 8-hour workday to achieve reliable quantification. For a 40-hour sampling period, corresponding to a traditional workweek, the threshold drops to ~5 ng/m3. At higher GEM concentrations, (i) even shorter sampling times are achievable, and (ii) a thicker diffusive barrier can be used, which increases precision by better controlling sampling rates. Side-by-side comparisons of the PAS in a number of occupational settings with personal pumped samplers support the validity of using occupational exposure estimates acquired with a PAS.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207