MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132971175

Comparing the Oxidative Potential of Fine Ambient Particulate Matter Across Airsheds in Canada

2021· dissertation· W7132971175 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dana Umbrio

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2021
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticulatesCombustionOxidative phosphorylationCoal combustion productsGlutathioneCoal
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oxidative potential (OP) and oxidative burden (OB) are being explored as more health-relevant metrics for assessing the risk of particulate matter. Correlations with different metals have been reported, although the findings are often conflicting, and thus not readily generalizable across locations or airsheds. Approximately 1000 PM2.5 samples, collected from June 2016 until December 2018 in forty cities across Canada, were analyzed using three standardized acellular assays: ascorbate (AA), glutathione (GSH) and dithiothreitol (DTT). Linear and multilinear correlations analyses revealed that different metals were influencing OP and OB to different degrees across the airsheds. In particular, OB values for all three assays were associated with Cu and Fe, and in addition, OBAA with S and K and OBGSH with K. The highest OP and OB values were seen in the East Central airshed, while the lowest were in the Southern Atlantic and Northern airsheds. AA and DTT activity are associated with coal combustion and combustion emissions while GSH activity is associated with anthropogenic metals.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.307 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicAir Quality and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→