Fragmentation of hunting bullets observed with synchrotron radiation: Lighting up the source of a lesser-known lead exposure pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bullet fragments have been previously observed in the remains and edible portions of big game animals that were harvested using rifles. The fragmentation issue has attracted attention because traditional hunting bullets are more than 70% lead, which is toxic to humans and scavengers in the ecosystem. We prepared gunshot wounds in ballistic gelatin blocks, and then applied synchrotron X-ray imaging technology to the bullet fragmentation process for the first time. The K edge subtraction (KES) imaging method allowed a clear separation of lead in an image from false positives, including the other major bullet component, copper, and non-lead objects such as bone fragments. The superior brightness of synchrotron radiation was also harnessed to resolve thousands of embedded sub-10 μm fragments, a size range not previously observed using commonly applied X-ray imaging modalities. The results challenge the current understanding of the maximum extent that fragments may be distributed, and the effectiveness of imaging methods used to screen wild game donations at food banks for lead bullet fragments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".