Sensing and Delineating Mixed-VOC Composition in Air Using a Single Metal-Oxide Sensor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monitoring volatile organic compounds (VOCs) places a crucial role in environmental pollutants control and indoor air quality. In this study, a metal-oxide (MOx) sensor detector (uRAD A3 mobile air quality monitor) was employed to delineate the composition of air containing three common VOCs (ethanol, acetone and hexane) under various concentrations. Experiments with a single component and double components were conducted to investigate how the solvents interact with the metal oxide sensor. The experimental results revealed that the affinity between VOC and sensor was in the following order: acetone > ethanol > n-hexane. A mathematical model was developed, based on the experimental findings and data analysis, to convert the output resistance value of the sensor into concentration values, which in turn can be used to calculate a VOC-based air quality index. Empirical equations were established based on inferences of vapor composition versus resistance trends, and on an approach of using original and diluted air samples to generate two sets of resistance data per sample. The calibration of numerous model parameters allowed matching simulated curves to measured data. As such, the predictive mathematical model enabled quantifying not only the total concentration of sensed VOCs, but also estimating the VOC composition. This first attempt to obtain semi-quantitative data from a single MOx sensor is aimed at expanding the capability of mobile air pollutants monitoring devices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".