CADMIUM AND CADMIUM COMPOUNDS Cadmium and cadmium compounds were considered by previous IARC Working Groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
consideration in the present evaluation. 1. Exposure Data 1.1 Identification of the agents Synonyms, trade names and molecular formulae for cadmium, cadmium–copper alloy, and some cadmium compounds are presented in Table 1.1. The cadmium compounds shown are those for which data on carcinogenicity or mutagenicity were available or which are commercially important compounds. It is not an exhaustive list, and does not necessarily include all of the most commercially important cadmium-containing substances. 1.2 Chemical and physical properties of the agents Cadmium (atomic number, 48; relative atomic mass, 112.41) is a metal, which belongs to group IIB of the periodic table. The oxidation state of almost all cadmium compounds is +2, although a few compounds have been reported in which it is +1. Selected chemical and physical properties of cadmium compounds are presented in the previous IARC Monograph (IARC, 1993a). 1.3 Use of the agents Cadmium metal has specific properties that make it suitable for a wide variety of industrial applications. These include: excellent corrosion resistance, low melting temperature, high ductility, high thermal and electrical conductivity (National Resources Canada, 2007). It is used and traded globally as a metal and as a component in six classes of products, where it imparts distinct performance advantages. According to the US Geological Survey, the principal uses of cadmium in 2007 were: nickel– cadmium (Ni–Cd) batteries, 83%; pigments, 8%; coatings and plating, 7%; stabilizers for plastics, 1.2%; and other (includes non-ferrous alloys, semiconductors and photovoltaic devices), 0.8%
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".