MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323318406 · doi:10.3390/atmos14030506

Methodology for Mobile Toxics Deterministic Human Health Risk Assessment and Case Study

2023· article· en· W4323318406 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Munshed, Jesse Van Griensven Thé, Roydon Fraser

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmosphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAERMODHazardous wasteAir quality indexCriteria air contaminantsEnvironmental scienceHazardous air pollutantsHuman healthPollutantAir pollutionRisk assessmentClean Air ActEmission inventoryAir pollutant concentrationsWork (physics)Atmospheric dispersion modelingAir pollutantsEnvironmental healthWaste managementEngineeringComputer scienceMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air toxic emissions from on-road mobile sources are significant contributors to the degradation of air quality in urban and dense population centers. Research led by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified more than 1162 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) in the exhaust and evaporative emissions from on-road mobile sources. However, less than 70 hazardous air pollutants are monitored by regulatory agencies. HAPs emitted from Mobile Sources are known as Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs). The EPA estimates that approximately half of the cancer risk and 74% of noncancer health impacts from air toxics is attributed to mobile sources. The quantification of the risk associated with MSATs exposure remains limited to date, and only a few MSATs have ambient air quality standards to protect human health and welfare. This work presents a novel and validated methodology to quantify the myriad health risks associated with exposure to on-road mobile emissions. This methodology is introduced in the form of a pipelined analysis process, which may be employed in existing and new transportation projects. The proposed new methodology integrates results from three different types of models: on-road vehicle emissions inventory models such as MOVES and IVE, air dispersion models such as AERMOD and SCIPUFF, and risk estimate models for human and ecological receptors such as the 2005 Final U.S. EPA Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities. The result of this research work is a new methodology that provides regulators and risk analysts with a more detailed awareness of the health impacts of MSATs. A case study of Saint Paul, Minnesota, validated the air dispersion modeled results against monitored data, and the agreement was acceptable (i.e., the estimates were within a factor of two of the observations). Three high-population locations in the Saint Paul area were evaluated for human health risk, with the observation that at two of these locations, the Saint Paul—Ramsey Health Center and Anderson Office Building, the calculated cancer risk is in excess of the target risk level of 1.0E-05 for benzo(a)pyrene. The methodology presented in this paper allows regulators, risk analysts, and air quality engineers to better estimate multi-pathway cancer and noncancer risk associated with acute and chronic exposure to MSATs. Moreover, this work provides a science-based aid to policy decision makers when considering factors that most significantly affect population health and ecology.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmosphereSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207