MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000877276 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b06379

Toward a Global Understanding of Chemical Pollution: A First Comprehensive Analysis of National and Regional Chemical Inventories

2020· article· en· W3000877276 on OpenAlexaff
Zhanyun Wang, Glen W. Walker, Derek C. G. Muir, Kakuko Nagatani-Yoshida

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHistory and advancements in chemistry
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmPollutionChemical industryEnvironmental planningBusinessEnvironmental resource managementNatural resource economicsEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEcologyBiologyEconomicsEnvironmental engineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemicals, while bringing benefits to society, may be released during their lifecycles and possibly cause harm to humans and ecosystems. Chemical pollution has been mentioned as one of the planetary boundaries within which humanity can safely operate, but is not comprehensively understood. Here, 22 chemical inventories from 19 countries and regions are analyzed to achieve a first comprehensive overview of chemicals on the market as an essential first step toward a global understanding of chemical pollution. Over 350 000 chemicals and mixtures of chemicals have been registered for production and use, up to three times as many as previously estimated and with substantial differences across countries/regions. A noteworthy finding is that the identities of many chemicals remain publicly unknown because they are claimed as confidential (over 50 000) or ambiguously described (up to 70 000). Coordinated efforts by all stakeholders including scientists from different disciplines are urgently needed, with (new) areas of interest and opportunities highlighted here.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 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

Citations1,033
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicHistory and advancements in chemistryFrench-language works237,207