MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117131092 · doi:10.11159/ijtan.2025.003

Performance of Chemical Protective Clothing against Nanoscale Particles: Preliminary Work on the Influence of the Environmental Working Conditions

2025· article· W7117131092 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ludwig Vinches, Stéphane Hallé

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied Nanotechnology · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingWork (physics)Scale (ratio)Working environmentMetal working

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemical protective clothing (CPC) is widely used to protect the skin from airborne nanoscale particles (ANP).While many studies have evaluated CPC materials, few have considered the influence of environmental conditions.However, temperature and relative humidity can significantly alter filtration processes and, as a result, the performance of CPC.Employing NaCl and TiO2 ANP, the performance of a model of CPC has evaluated in some different conditions of temperature (20C to 40C) and relative humidity (RH) (40% to 80%).Longtime exposure (clogging effect) has also been investigated.Results indicate that temperature and RH significantly affect the penetration of NaCl and TiO2 rutile ANP, particularly in shortterm exposures.Secondly, clogging due to the deposit of NaCl ANP on the filtering fibers is measured each thirty minutes of exposure up to three hours with a RH of 40%, 60% and 80%.At 40% and 60% RH, the penetration seems to be stable.At 80% of RH, the penetration decreases by more than 10-15% with the exposure time.These findings highlight the importance of considering environmental conditions when selecting and using CPC for ANP protection.Future research should investigate the long-term effects of exposure to ANP under various environmental conditions.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 venueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied NanotechnologySame topicNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsFrench-language works237,207