Risk-Based Chemical Ranking and Generating a Prioritized Human Exposome Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to the ubiquitous use of chemicals in modern society, humans are increasingly exposed to thousands of chemicals that contribute to a major portion of the human exposome. Should a comprehensive and risk-based human exposome database be created, it would be conducive to the rapid progress of human exposomics research. In addition, once a xenobiotic is biotransformed with distinct half-lives upon exposure, monitoring the parent compounds alone may not reflect the actual human exposure. To address these questions, a comprehensive and risk-prioritized human exposome database is needed. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to set up a comprehensive risk-prioritized human exposome database including physicochemical properties as well as risk prediction and develop a graphical user interface (GUI) that has the ability to conduct searches for content associated with chemicals in our database. METHODS: We built a comprehensive risk-prioritized human exposome database by text mining and database fusion. Subsequently, chemicals were prioritized by integrating exposure level obtained from the Systematic Empirical Evaluation of Models with toxicity data predicted by the Toxicity Estimation Software Tool and the Toxicological Priority Index calculated from the ToxCast database. The biotransformation half-lives (HL B s) of all the chemicals were assessed using the Iterative Fragment Selection approach and biotransformation products were predicted using the previously developed BioTransformer machine-learning method. RESULTS: We compiled a human exposome database of >20,000 chemicals, prioritized 13,441 chemicals based on probabilistic hazard quotient and 7,770 chemicals based on risk index, and provided a predicted biotransformation metabolite database of >95,000 metabolites. In addition, a userinteractive Java software (Oracle)-based search GUI was generated to enable open access to this new resource. DISCUSSION: Our database can be used to guide chemical management and enhance scientific understanding to rapidly and effectively prioritize chemicals for comprehensive biomonitoring in epidemiological investigations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".