Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter is about organic chlorofluoro hydrocarbons, which are fully or partly halogenated hydrocarbons that contain carbon (C), hydrogen (H), chlorine (Cl), and fluorine (F). In the early 1930s, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were introduced in the 1930s as “safe” replacements for refrigerants such as sulfur dioxide, ammonia, carbon tetrachloride, and chloroform. The list was later expanded during World War II to include their use to produce insecticide aerosols to protect the troops in tropical areas against malaria and other insect‐borne diseases. Current usages include foam blowing, precision cleaning, and propellants for medicinal, cosmetic, and general‐purpose aerosols, air conditioning, and refrigeration. The expanded use of these CFCs has resulted in their emissions into the atmosphere. The CFCs have low chemical reactivity, long atmospheric lifetime, and are globally distributed. However, since they are ozone‐depleting and are also powerful greenhouse gases (GHGs), development was initiated to replace them with comparatively less ozone‐depleting and less greenhouse‐warming hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). Subsequently, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were developed that were both less ozone‐depleting and less GHGs accumulating. Both CFCs and HCFCs are controlled under the Montreal Protocol. The widespread use concerns about their environmental and human health effects of these substances have been extensively reviewed. This chapter updates information on the health effects of some of the major and minor CFCs, HCFCs, and HFCs, their global emissions estimates, the discrepancies, if any, between the major reporting regions and the global atmospheric emissions values, and the likely sources of the gap between the atmospheric measurements and the reported emissions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.024 |
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".