MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3039295419 · doi:10.1201/9781003053071-29

Evaluation and Mitigation of the Environmental Impact of Synthetic Microfibers

2020· book-chapter· en· W3039295419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francesca De Falco, Mariacristina Cocca, Emilia Di Pace, Maria Emanuela Errico, Gennaro Gentile, Maurizio Avella

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofiberEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The washing of synthetic fabrics has been identified recently as one of the major contributors to the global release of primary microplastics to the oceans. The mechanical and chemical stresses of a washing process can cause the detachment of “microfibers” from the yarns composing a fabric, which cannot be completely removed by wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Also, WWTPs should have an important role as barriers for the entrance of microplastics into aquatic environments, particularly for microfibers from the washing of synthetic clothes. The Canadian company Environmental Enhancements is selling the Lint LUV-R Washing Machine Discharge Filter as a device capable of screening out synthetic microplastic particulates, but no studies on its actual efficiencies are available. In conclusion, an effective prevention of microplastic release from the washing processes of synthetic clothes can be achieved only by applying mitigation actions at different stages including textile design, finishing treatments, washing method, and the treatment at WWTPs.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution→French-language works237,207→