MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Herb vaping produces carbonyls in mainstream smoke

2024· article· en· W4404097869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Efthimios Zervas, Chara Tsipa, Niki Matsouki, Evi Bekou, Maria Markygianni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiochemical effects in animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamHerbSidestream smokeSmokeComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceChemistryTraditional medicineMedicinal herbsOrganic chemistryMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years there has been a shift towards herb vaping; however, there are very few studies determining the compounds emitted. This work studies the carbonyls emitted in the mainstream emissions of a herb vaporizer using: chamomile(CHAM), cannabis(CANN), thyme(THYM), lavender(LAV), passiflora(PASS), green tea(GREEN), eucalyptus(EUC), at 215 and 225°C, under International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and Health Canada Intense (HCI/CAN) puffing regimes. The carbonyls are collected in acidified DNPH solution and analyzed by HPLC-UV. Five carbonyls were detected. Formaldehyde, propionaldehyde and crotonaldehyde were below the limit of detection. Acetaldehyde and butyraldehyde were found to be predominant in the carbonyl content of herbs. The first is found at 2-5 times higher concentrations than the latter. The results (Fig 1, Fig 2) show that emission of carbonyls increase with temperature. The impact of smoking regime is not clear. There is a high variability on the emission of carbonyls as a function of herb. CANN emits more acetaldehyde than the other herbs, while CHAM is the herb that emits the most butyraldehyde. Fig 1. Emission of acetaldehyde <fig><object-id>erj;64/suppl_68/PA4030/F1</object-id><object-id>F1</object-id><object-id>F1</object-id><graphic></graphic></fig> Fig 2. Emission of butyraldehyde <fig><object-id>erj;64/suppl_68/PA4030/F2</object-id><object-id>F2</object-id><object-id>F2</object-id><graphic></graphic></fig>

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiochemical effects in animalsFrench-language works237,207