MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307773198 · doi:10.1111/ina.13134

Evaluation of fixed and adaptive concentration thresholds for particle filter systems

2022· article· en· W4307773198 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexander Y. Mendell, Alexander W Olson, Jeffrey A. Siegel

Bibliographic record

VenueIndoor Air · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParticle filterEnvironmental scienceParticle (ecology)Filter (signal processing)Biological systemAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Particle filtration can effectively reduce indoor concentrations of particulate matter (PM) but may incur high energy use. This study evaluates fixed and adaptive concentration thresholds to automate the operation of filtration systems. Simulated environments were derived from week-long continuous PM measurements from Dylos DC1700 (N = 104) and Alphasense OPC-N2 (N = 100) particle counters deployed in apartments in Toronto. A fixed threshold of 4.0 μg·m−3 resulted in a mean air cleaner runtime of 6.9%–21.0% depending on clean air delivery rate (CADR) and particle sensor, while providing mean concentration reductions of 67%–71% compared to operating the air cleaner constantly (runtime = 100%). In most environments, runtime could be further reduced by raising the fixed threshold while resulting in only a modest decrease in absolute and normalized mean exposure reduction. Using an adaptive threshold derived from a k-means clustering approach generally provided substantial exposure reduction while preventing high runtimes. These results were generally insensitive to cleaning power and the monitor used to measure particle concentrations. Reducing the energy usage of particle filter systems will make them a more viable and sustainable means of improving occupant health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndoor AirSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207