MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417064576 · doi:10.1088/2977-3504/ae286f

The PFAS roadmap–Navigating a path together to improved management

2025· article· en· W4417064576 on OpenAlexaff
Lokesh P. Padhye, Mélanie Kah, Erin M. Leitao, Karl C. Bowles, C. Paul Nathanail, Ian T. Cousins, Romain Figuière, Bradley O. Clarke, Jordan M Partington, Wejdan Alghamdi, Elsie M. Sunderland, Bridger J. Ruyle, Tamara Jessica Brown, Zhengyang Wang, Joseph J. Pignatello, Sanne J. Smith, Marcel Riegel, Hans Peter H. Arp, Jens Blotevogel, Robert Giraud, Anthony K. Rappé, Erlend Sørmo, Gerard Cornelissen, Marc A. Deshusses, Igor Novosselov, P. Lee Ferguson, Brian R. Pinkard, Timothy J. Strathmann, Kapish Gobindlal, Jonathan Sperry, Elisabeth Cuervo Lumbaque, Nick Duinslaeger, Jelena Radjenović, James Hatton

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsARC Resources (Canada)
FundersEnvironmental Security Technology Certification ProgramStrategic Environmental Research and Development ProgramNorges ForskningsrådEuropean CommissionSmall Business Innovation ResearchNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNew York State Department of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPath (computing)Work (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) represent a large-and structurally diverse-group of contaminants that have become ubiquitous in our environment. PFAS are all extremely persistent while some are also bioaccumulative, mobile and/or toxic, which gives rise to significant environmental and health concerns. Despite more than a decade of intensive research, the management of PFAS is still associated with considerable challenges. It is evident that a holistic approach is required to address the challenging global problem of PFAS. This roadmap features expert perspectives from world-renowned leading researchers and practitioners on how best to manage PFAS. The 15 topics cover different facets of the complex PFAS issue, providing a multidisciplinary and multisectoral overview. For each topic, we reflect on the current status of knowledge and offer recommendations on science and technology advances that will help meet current and future challenges. Taken together, the 15 topics cover the entire life cycle of PFAS-from their sources to their destruction. Important themes such as monitoring and analysis, understanding and predicting fate, source controls (regulation and replacement), and existing and emerging strategies for remediation (capture and destroy) are highlighted throughout the roadmap. Overall, there are many recent scientific and technological advancements that show promise for the management of PFAS. However, it is also clear that there is no 'silver bullet' and multifaceted solutions will be needed. Long-term success hinges on sustained collaboration among researchers, policymakers, industries, and communities, which we hope this roadmap will help to catalyze.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.018
Open science0.0050.013
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.011

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainability Science and TechnologySame topicMedical Coding and Health InformationFrench-language works237,207