Toward setting public health guidelines for chemicals in indoor settled dust?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indoor settled dust may result in substantial human exposure to chemicals, especially by ingestion following hand-to-mouth or hand-to-object-to-mouth contact. As with other environmental media related to exposure, dust may thus be subject to regulation. An international scientific workshop was convened in Paris in September 2019 firstly to assess the relevance for public health of setting guidelines for indoor settled dust, and secondly to discuss scientific and technical challenges related to such guidelines. The main discussions and conclusions, with consensus achieved, are reported herein. Discussions concerned general considerations, objectives and definitions, relevance for a health-based guideline, units of measure, and finally derivation of the guideline. These points should be addressed when considering an indoor settled dust guideline as part of a policy to reduce exposure indoors to a given chemical or group of chemicals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.097 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.025 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".