Nickel’s carcinogenicity: the need of more studies to progress
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On March 8-15, 2022, a board of international scientists assembled in Lyon to evaluate the carcinogenicity of cobalt metal, cobalt(II) salts, antimony trioxide, and weapons-grade tungsten alloy harboring nickel and cobalt [1].The 131st International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monograph is the result of a 6-9month work of perusing the literature, slide evaluation, data interpretation, and interim meetings.The assessment of cobalt, antimony, and nickel-containing alloys will have tremendous consequences for the industry, health, and defense departments [1].Armor-penetrating projectiles utilize tungsten alloys of weapons-grade quality, consisting of 91-93% tungsten, 2-4% cobalt, and 3-5% nickel.Inhalation of hazardous substances can occur because of occupational exposure in weapons production.Both military personnel and civilians may encounter nickel-containing metal aerosols that are generated during the firing or impact of weapons.Long-term exposure to residual embedded fragments from munitions can pose significant hazards.The available exposure data were limited, nevertheless, the
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 it