MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417149029 · doi:10.1136/military-2025-003166

Air quality and particulate assessment in wood-heated military tents during arctic field training: implications for health and environmental safety

2025· article· en· W4417149029 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas van den Berg, Darine Ameyed, Yanis Ouali, Anthony Levasseur, Jani P. Vaara, Tommi Ojanen, François Haman, Xavier Neyt, Guido Simonelli, Nathalie Pattyn

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Military Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCanadian Sleep & Circadian NetworkUniversité de MontréalUniversity of New BrunswickCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersOffice of Naval Research GlobalOffice of Naval Research
KeywordsParticulatesAir quality indexAir pollutionField (mathematics)Environmental qualityEnvironmental impact assessmentArcticAir pollutants

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Figure 1 Fine (PM2.5) and Coarse (PM10) particulate matter (PM) levels in the tent for the sensor placed on the ground, over a 12-hour overnight period, during which cadets slept in the same tent.Very hazardous levels were met early in the night and declined over time.PM10 had a higher peak of dangerous levels and also showed a sharper decline compared to PM2.5.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.407 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Military HealthSame topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207