MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081101829 · doi:10.1039/d0em00194e

Passive air sampling for semi-volatile organic chemicals

2020· article· en· W3081101829 on OpenAlexafffund
Frank Wania, Chubashini Shunthirasingham

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science Processes & Impacts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryPassive samplingSampling (signal processing)Organic chemicalsWaste managementChemistryEngineeringTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During passive air sampling, the amount of a chemical taken up in a sorbent from the air without the help of a pump is quantified and converted into an air concentration. In an equilibrium sampler, this conversion requires a thermodynamic parameter, the equilibrium sorption coefficient between gas-phase and sorbent. In a kinetic sampler, a time-averaged air concentration is obtained using a sampling rate, which is a kinetic parameter. Design requirements for kinetic and equilibrium sampling conflict with each other. The volatility of semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) varies over five orders of magnitude, which implies that passive air samplers are inevitably kinetic samplers for less volatile SVOCs and equilibrium samplers for more volatile SVOCs. Therefore, most currently used passive sampler designs for SVOCs are a compromise that requires the consideration of both a thermodynamic and a kinetic parameter. Their quantitative interpretation depends on assumptions that are rarely fulfilled, and on input parameters, that are often only known with high uncertainty. Kinetic passive air sampling for SVOCs is also challenging because their typically very low atmospheric concentrations necessitate relatively high sampling rates that can only be achieved without the use of diffusive barriers. This in turn renders sampling rates dependent on wind conditions and therefore highly variable. Despite the overall high uncertainty arising from these challenges, passive air samplers for SVOCs have valuable roles to play in recording (i) spatial concentration variability at scales ranging from a few centimeters to tens of thousands of kilometers, (ii) long-term trends, (iii) air contamination in remote and inaccessible locations and (iv) indoor inhalation exposure. Going forward, thermal desorption of sorbents may lower the detection limits for some SVOCs to an extent that the use of diffusive barriers in the kinetic sampling of SVOCs becomes feasible, which is a prerequisite to decreasing the uncertainty of sampling rates. If the thermally stable sorbent additionally has a high sorptive capacity, it may be possible to design true kinetic samplers for most SVOCs. In the meantime, the passive air sampling community would benefit from being more transparent by rigorously quantifying and explicitly reporting uncertainty.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations116
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science Processes & ImpactsSame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207