MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046429556

Determinación de los niveles de plomo y cadmio en labiales en barra multimarca mediante espectrofotometría de absorción atómica según comercialización en Lima cercado

2017· dissertation· en· W7046429556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuerenati · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Resource Management and Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadmiumAtomic absorption spectroscopyGraphite furnace atomic absorptionStatistical analysisGraphite
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study had the following objective: to establish the differences in levels of lead and cadmium in multibrand bar lipids determined by atomic absorption spectrophotometry according to commercialization in Lima Cercado, the methodology used responds to the following typification: Cuasiexperimental Design Type: Descriptive correlational, Transversal, Applied. Population: Labials marketed around the Central Market of Lima. Sample: Formal Sale (06) Informal Sale (09), Technical Data Collection Techniques: Atomic Absorption Spectrometry associated with graphite furnace. Instruments of data collection: Observation sheet. Results: The percentage of lead and cadmium in lipsticks, in the case of the brands Wendy, Rose Paris, Rojo Cereza and Be Matte, is higher than 10% of the total lead of lipsticks (ppm); while the brands Wendy, Lucys, Rojo Cereza and P & W exceeded 10% of Cadmium total of lipsticks (ppm). Conclusion: Concentration levels of lead and cadmium at 100% are in the range allowed by not exceeding the limits according to the Canadian international standard of 10ppm in multi-brand bar lipsticks

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuerenatiSame topicWater Resource Management and QualityFrench-language works237,207