A comparative time-series analysis and deep learning projection of innate radon gas risk in Canadian and Swedish residential buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accumulation of radioactive radon gas in indoor air poses a serious risk to human health by increasing the lifetime risk of lung cancer and is classified by IARC as a category one carcinogen. Radon exposure risks are a function of geologic, geographic, building design, and human behavioural variables, and can change over time. Using time series and deep machine learning modelling, we analyzed long-term radon test outcomes as a function of building metrics from 25,489 Canadian and 38,596 Swedish residential properties constructed between 1945 to 2020. While Canadian and Swedish properties built between 1970 and 1980 are comparable (96–103 Bq/m 3 ), innate radon risks subsequently diverge, rising in Canada and falling in Sweden such that 21 st Century Canadian houses show 467% greater average radon (131 Bq/m 3 ) relative to Swedish equivalents (28 Bq/m 3 ). These trends are consistent across housing types and regions within each country. The introduction of energy efficiency measures within Canadian and Swedish building codes coincided with opposing radon level trajectories in each nation. Deep machine learning modelling predicts that, without intervention, average Canadian residential radon levels will increase to 176 Bq/m 3 by 2050, emphasizing the importance and urgency of future building code intervention to achieve systemic radon reduction in Canada.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".