Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Chrysotile is mineralogically distinct from amphiboles, displaying a notably different chemical structure. The thin sheets that form chrysotile fiber lead to the ability of the lung/macrophage system to decompose the chrysotile fibers. This study was performed in order to compare the physicochemical characteristics of Korean asbestos with those of Canadian amphiboles. Materials: An acid solubility test for each test substance was done to compare pH 4.5 and pH 1.2 distilled water. Asbestos fibers which had been placed in acid solutions for five days, five weeks and weeks were analyzed with a transmission electron microscope equipped with an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (TEM-EDS). Results: The composition element (Mg) of Korean chrysotile, Korean anthophyllite and Canadian amosite significantly decreased from 5 days and also decreased significantly after 5 weeks and 10 weeks. Only the composition (Mg) of Canadian crocidolite did not change under any conditions. From 5 days, the Mg of Korean chrysotile, Korean anthophyllite and Canadian amosite were significantly lower than before the acid treatment, but there were no changes over time or by the pH of the acid solutions. Particularly after 10 weeks, the composition (Mg) of Korean chrysotile in the pH 1.2 acid solution showed a rapid reduction of 15.86%. Conclusions: Korean chrysotile was very weak in an acid environment, beginning to show significant changes after 5 days. The Mg component rapidly decreased after 10 weeks in the pH 1.2 acid solution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".