A Review of Air Ionization with Negative Ions for Aerosol Removal and Inactivation of Airborne Microorganisms in Confined Spaces
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
A comprehensive literature review was conducted to summarize and analyze the mechanisms and applications of air ionization for aerosol removal and inactivation of airborne microorganisms in confined spaces. This review focuses on engineered ionization systems (ionizers) that generate negative ions through corona discharge. Numerous studies have proven that air ionization is effective in removing aerosols and inactivating airborne microorganisms in confined spaces. Multiple physical, chemical, and biological processes may be involved in air ionization, including corona discharge and ion generation, attachment of ions to aerosol particles, transport of ions and aerosols in the air, electrostatic drift, deposition of aerosol particles on surfaces, and inactivation of biological agents if air ionization is used to prevent the spread of airborne pathogens. Each of these processes, as well as their interactions, is extremely complex, and only a limited number of studies have explored the interplays of these processes or attempted to integrate them into models that quantify the fundamental behavior of air ionization.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it