MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133064762

Development, Characterization and Field Testing of a Passive Air Sampler for Monitoring Occupational Exposure to Mercury Vapors

2020· dissertation· W7133064762 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie Anne Snow

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2020
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Passive samplingOccupational exposureInhalation exposureSampling (signal processing)Exposure assessmentContamination
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An activated carbon-based passive air sampler for gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) was modified for personal exposure monitoring. Calibration yielded a sampling rate of 0.070 m3/day. Deployments lasting 8 hours result in method detection limits below the ASTDR and WHO minimum risk level of 200 ng/m3. The sampler has a measurement range of at least four orders of magnitude. Passive sampler derived air concentrations were not statistically significantly different from active air samplers, but passive sampling was more precise than personal pump sampling. Stationary and personal passive air samplers were used to characterize inhalation exposure to GEM of individuals (1) crushing mercury-containing compact fluorescent lights, (2) living and working in two Ghanaian artisanal and small-scale gold mining communities and (3) working at a Norwegian electronics recycling facility. Exposure concentrations ranging from

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→