Phthalic Acid and Derivatives, 2. Toxicology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The article contains sections titled: 1 Introduction 2 Toxicological Profiles of Phthalic Acid and Its Anhydride, Imide, and Nitrile 2.1 Phthalic Acid 2.2 Phthalic Anhydride 2.3 Phthalimide 2.4 Phthalonitrile 3 Phthalate Esters 3.1 General 3.2 Acute Toxicity 3.3 Irritation and Sensitizing Potential 3.4 Toxicokinetics 4 Individual Phthalate Esters 4.1 Di(2‐ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) 4.1.1 Exposure 4.1.2 Acute Toxicity 4.1.3 Metabolism and Toxicokinetics 4.1.4 Repeated Dose Studies 4.1.5 Genotoxicity and Mutagenicity 4.1.6 Carcinogenicity 4.1.7 Initiation/Promotion Experiments 4.1.8 Reproductive Toxicity 4.2 Diisononyl Phthalate (DINP) 4.2.1 Exposure 4.2.2 Acute Toxicity 4.2.3 Pharmacokinetics, Metabolism, and Mechanisms 4.2.4 Chronic and Subchronic Toxicity 4.2.5 Reproductive and Developmental Effects 4.2.6 Carcinogenesis 4.2.7 Genetic and Related Cellular Effects Studies 4.2.8 Human Experience 4.2.9 Standards, Regulations, or Guidelines of Exposure 4.3 Di(2‐ethylhexyl) Terephthalate (DEHT) 4.3.1 Exposure 4.3.2 Acute Toxicity 4.3.3 Metabolism and Toxicokinetics 4.3.4 Chronic and Subchronic Toxicity 4.3.5 Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity 4.3.6 Carcinogenesis 4.3.7 Genetic and Related Cellular Effect Studies 4.3.8 Other: Neurological, Pulmonary, Skin Sensitization 4.3.9 Regulations 4.4 Longer‐Chain Phthalate Esters (C8–C12) 4.4.1 Repeated Dose Studies 4.4.2 Genotoxicity and Carcinogenicity 4.4.3 Reproductive Toxicology 4.5 Risk Assessment 5 Risk Management Acknowledgments References <
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".