Occurrence of aryl and alkyl-aryl phosphates in Canadian house dust
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the occurrence of 19 aryl phosphates and mixed alkyl-aryl phosphates in dust samples (n = 144) collected under the Canadian House Dust Study (CHDS). The predominant target analytes, detected in 100 % of the samples, were isodecyl diphenyl phosphate (IDDPP), cresyl diphenyl phosphate (CDPP), and isopropylated triaryl phosphates (ITPs), with median concentrations of 1225 (248–17850) ng/g, 91 (14–57700) ng/g, and 805 (203–152000) ng/g, respectively. ITPs included isopropylphenyl diphenyl phosphate (IPPDPP), bis(isopropylphenyl) phenyl phosphate (BIPPPP), and tris(isopropylphenyl) phosphate (TIPPP). Strong correlations were found among IPPDPP, BIPPPP, and TIPPP, suggesting that there might be various consumer and building products containing mixtures of these substances. Bisphenol A bis(diphenyl phosphate) (BPA-DP) and resorcinol bis(diphenyl phosphate) (RBDP) were detected in 69 % and 78 % of samples, with relatively low median concentrations of 30 (max: 818) ng/g and 14 (max: 307) ng/g, respectively. Since the usage of OPEs as flame retardants has increased over the past decade, the current levels of OPEs in Canadian house dust could be higher than those reported in this study, where the samples were collected in 2007–2010. Further monitoring of OPEs in various environmental and biological matrices is recommended.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".