MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282921782 · doi:10.1039/d2em00103a

Fate-directed risk assessment of chemical mixtures: a case study for cedarwood essential oil

2022· article· en· W4282921782 on OpenAlexaff
Roxana Sühring, Philipp Mayer, P.E.G. Leonards, Matthew MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science Processes & Impacts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersEuropean Chemical Industry Council
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRisk assessmentRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental chemistryPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental healthBiochemical engineeringChemistryBusinessEngineeringComputer scienceMedicineComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

fate-directed risk assessment framework for UVCBs using cedarwood oil as a case study. The framework uses Monte Carlo simulations and the mass-balance models SimpleTreat and RAIDAR to provide quantitative information on whether unidentified constituents within the physical-chemical property space of a UVCB can be the decisive factor for the environmental risk of the entire UVCB. Thereby the framework provides a robust decision tool to evaluate if a UVCB risk assessment requires additional tests or if the data on known constituents is representative for the risk of the entire UVCB. In the case of cedarwood oil, it could be shown that a risk assessment based on the known constituents (representing around 70% of the overall UVCB by weight) is representative for the environmental risk of the entire UVCB - reducing the need for additional testing and test animals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science Processes & ImpactsSame topicContact Dermatitis and AllergiesFrench-language works237,207