Archetypes of Spatial Concentration Variability of Organic Contaminants in the Atmosphere: Implications for Identifying Sources and Mapping the Gaseous Outdoor Inhalation Exposome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas inhalation exposure to organic contaminants can negatively impact human health, knowledge of their spatial variability in the ambient atmosphere remains limited. We analyzed the extracts of passive air samplers deployed at 119 unique sites in Southern Canada between 2019 and 2022 for 353 organic vapors. Hierarchical clustering of the obtained data set revealed four archetypes of spatial concentration variability in the outdoor atmosphere, which are indicative of common sources and similar atmospheric dispersion behavior. "Point Source" signatures are characterized by elevated concentration in the vicinity of major release locations. A "Population" signature applies to compounds whose air concentrations are highly correlated with population density, and is associated with emissions from consumer products. The "Water Source" signature applies to substances with elevated levels in the vicinity of water bodies from which they evaporate. Another group of compounds displays a "Uniform" signature, indicative of a lack of major sources within the study area. We illustrate how such a data set, and the derived spatial patterns, can be applied to support the identification of sources, the quantification of atmospheric emissions, the modeling of air quality, and the investigation of potential inequities in inhalation exposure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".