MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systematic Identification and Prioritization of Communities Impacted by Residential Woodsmoke in British Columbia, Canada

2018· article· en· W2919720256 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMinistry of EnvironmentUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityBC Centre for Disease Control
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyAir quality indexEnvironmental scienceSmokeEnvironmental protectionMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Residential woodsmoke is an under-regulated source of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), often surpassing mobile and industrial emissions in rural communities in North America and elsewhere. In the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada, many municipalities are hesitant to adopt stricter regulations for residential wood burning without empirical evidence that smoke is affecting local air quality. The objective of this study was to develop a retrospective algorithm that uses 1-hour PM2.5 concentrations and daily temperature data to identify smoky days in order to prioritize communities by smoke impacts.Methods: Levoglucosan measurements from one of the smokiest communities were used to establish the most informative values for three algorithmic parameters: the daily standard deviation of 1-hour PM2.5 measurements; the daily mean temperature; and the daytime-to-nighttime ratio of PM2.5 concentrations. Alternate parameterizations were tested in 45 sensitivity analyses, and 23 smaller communities (populations < 80,000) were ranked by the number of smoky days identified within a 2-year period.Results: Using the most informative parameter values on the most recent two years of data for each community, the number of smoky days ranged from 5 to 277 out of 730. Heat maps visualizing seasonal and diurnal variation in PM2.5 concentrations showed clear differences between the higher- and lower-ranked communities. Some communities were sensitive to one or more of the parameters, but the overall rankings were consistent across the 45 sensitivity analyses.Conclusions: This information will allow stakeholder agencies to work with local governments on implementing appropriate intervention strategies for the most smoke-impacted communities. It was also used to identify communities for more detailed assessment using mobile monitoring.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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