Development and Evaluation of a Holistic and Mechanistic Modeling Framework for Chemical Emissions, Fate, Exposure, and Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Large numbers of chemicals require evaluation to determine if their production and use pose potential risks to ecological and human health. For most chemicals, the inadequacy and uncertainty of chemical-specific data severely limit the application of exposure- and risk-based methods for screening-level assessments, priority setting, and effective management. OBJECTIVE: We developed and evaluated a holistic, mechanistic modeling framework for ecological and human health assessments to support the safe and sustainable production, use, and disposal of organic chemicals. METHODS: We consolidated various models for simulating the PROduction-To-EXposure (PROTEX) continuum with empirical data sets and models for predicting chemical property and use function information to enable high-throughput (HT) exposure and risk estimation. The new PROTEX-HT framework calculates exposure and risk by integrating mechanistic computational modules describing chemical behavior and fate in the socioeconomic system (i.e., life cycle emissions), natural and indoor environments, various ecological receptors, and humans. PROTEX-HT requires only molecular structure and chemical tonnage (i.e., annual production or consumption volume) as input information. We evaluated the PROTEX-HT framework using 95 organic chemicals commercialized in the United States and demonstrated its application in various exposure and risk assessment contexts. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent and 97% of the PROTEX-HT human exposure predictions were within one and two orders of magnitude, respectively, of independent human exposure estimates inferred from biomonitoring data. PROTEX-HT supported screening and ranking chemicals based on various exposure and risk metrics, setting chemical-specific maximum allowable tonnage based on user-defined toxicological thresholds, and identifying the most relevant emission sources, environmental media, and exposure routes of concern in the PROTEX continuum. The case study shows that high chemical tonnage did not necessarily result in high exposure or health risks. CONCLUSION: Requiring only two chemical-specific pieces of information, PROTEX-HT enables efficient screening-level evaluations of existing and premanufacture chemicals in various exposure- and risk-based contexts. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9372.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".