Effect of Capsule Burst in Cigarette Filters on the Compound Composition of Mainstream Cigarette Smoke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of cigarette capsule users is increasing; however, a comprehensive epidemiological investigation comparing the harmfulness of capsule and non-capsule cigarettes, particularly concerning the composition of flavor components and mainstream smoke, is lacking. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of capsule burst on the compound composition of mainstream smoke by quantifying the Hoffmann list and flavor (geraniol, eugenol, menthofuran, and pulegone) in mainstream smoke with and without crushing the capsules. The findings indicate that while tar values tended to increase when the capsules were burst, there was no significant change observed in the other Hoffmann list components, such as nicotine, benzo[α]pyrene, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, aromatic amines, and phenolics. However, when the capsules burst, menthofuran and pulegone, which were present in the capsule and could cause toxicity, were found in the mainstream smoke via the International Standard Organization (1.5-4.0 μg/cig and 5.13-6.00 μg/cig smoking regime) and Health Canada Intense (12.8-18.2 μg/cig and 22.77-24.67 μg/cig smoking regime). Therefore, understanding the capsule composition is important, as the toxic components of the capsules can be inhaled as smoke, posing a potential health risk.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".