Solid matter and soluble compounds collected from cigarette smoke and heated tobacco product aerosol using a laboratory designed puffing setup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A laboratory setup recently designed has been used to perform puffing experiments in conditions similar to those of Health Canada Intense regime with the purpose of collecting and studying any particulate and/or soluble matter generated as a result of cigarette smoking or Heets use in an IQOS device. Smoke or aerosol can leave deposited matter in several parts of the setup, roughly resembling the interaction with the human body. Samples have been collected from different parts of the setup. For cigarettes, the extracted solutions were yellowish, whereas they remained colourless for Heets. This indicates that the content of both the deposited particulate matter and the amount of soluble compounds were much higher in cigarettes smoke than in Heets aerosol. Not only quantitative differences have been found. Thus, the solid matter collected from cigarettes smoke contains some insoluble fractions mainly composed by C and O, but also by traces of S, K, Ca, Fe, As, Na, Al, Si, and Ba, while the analogous samples from Heets are mainly composed of C and O and are soluble in isopropanol. In addition, in Heets aerosol a relatively low fraction of the detected compounds corresponds to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), compared to the percentage of PAHs present in the cigarette smoke. When cigarettes were smoked under a continuous smoking regime (continuous air flow) solid matter was found to be deposited on a part of the setup. This collected solid matter was composed mainly of C and O (being mostly insoluble in water and partially soluble in isopropanol) and contained traces of heavy metals (As, Cd, Cr, Ni, Cu, and Pb).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".