Measurement and Prediction of Electromagnetic Radiation Exposure Level in a University Campus

2022 · Unclear · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream

UnclearInsufficient evidencePaper 871

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2022

Study typeexposure_assessment

Reported directionUnclear

Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

Measurement and Prediction of Electromagnetic Radiation Exposure Level in a University Campus Esin Karpat, M. Rafet Bakcan. Measurement and Prediction of Electromagnetic Radiation Exposure Level in a University Campus. Tehnički vjesnik, Vol. 29 No. 2, 2022. doi: 10.17559/TV-20200418183308. Abstract The importance of electromagnetic (EM) sources in human life has been increasing with the development of technology. EM radiation triggers some problems in our life such as EM interference and human health problems. EM radiation level which is emitted by the base station increases in proportion to the density of population in a region. EM exposure is higher in areas where people are highly concentrated such as hospitals, military barracks, schools, shopping malls, than in any other region. It is important to show sustained concern about the EM radiation intensity in these areas to keep the levels under the permissible limits. In this study, electric field values are measured statically at locations where the population density is too high, to examine the electric field intensity levels throughout the campus. Besides, two different artificial neural models (ANN) are developed to estimate the electric field values of random locations which are specific regions for electromagnetic exposure. Moreover, measurement results and estimated results are evaluated within the limits defined by national (ICTA) and international (ICNIRP) standards. Finally, the EM exposure map is constructed with data that is average electric field intensity versus measurement locations. Excerpt Measurements in the campus show that the maximum EMF value is 4.314 V/m while the minimum is 0.084 V/m. Also, the standard deviation value of the EMF level is 1.157 V/m while the average EMF level is 1.024 V/m. The average electric value measured around two base stations on the campus is 3.85 V/m while the average electric field value of other locations is 1.153 V/m. According to these data, it is determined that the contribution of locations, which are near the base station is approximately 300% higher than the other locations. Open access paper: hrcak.srce.hr

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeexposure_assessment

Effect directionunclear

PopulationNot supplied

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureNot supplied

Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Static measurements across the campus found a maximum EMF value of 4.314 V/m, a minimum of 0.084 V/m, an average of 1.024 V/m, and a standard deviation of 1.157 V/m. The average electric field measured around two base stations was 3.85 V/m versus 1.153 V/m at other locations, with locations near base stations contributing approximately 300% higher levels than other locations. Measurement and ANN-estimated results were evaluated against ICTA and ICNIRP limits, and an exposure map was constructed.

Outcomes measured

Electric field intensity (V/m) measurements across a university campus
Predicted electric field values using artificial neural network (ANN) models
Comparison to national (ICTA) and international (ICNIRP) limits
EM exposure map (average electric field intensity vs. location)

Limitations

Frequency band(s) and measurement instrumentation/method details are not provided in the abstract/excerpt.
No information on number of measurement locations or sampling scheme is provided.
No quantitative results of ANN model performance are provided in the abstract/excerpt.
No explicit statement in the abstract/excerpt about whether measured levels were below/above ICTA/ICNIRP limits.

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "base station",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Electric field intensity (V/m) measurements across a university campus",
    "Predicted electric field values using artificial neural network (ANN) models",
    "Comparison to national (ICTA) and international (ICNIRP) limits",
    "EM exposure map (average electric field intensity vs. location)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Static measurements across the campus found a maximum EMF value of 4.314 V/m, a minimum of 0.084 V/m, an average of 1.024 V/m, and a standard deviation of 1.157 V/m. The average electric field measured around two base stations was 3.85 V/m versus 1.153 V/m at other locations, with locations near base stations contributing approximately 300% higher levels than other locations. Measurement and ANN-estimated results were evaluated against ICTA and ICNIRP limits, and an exposure map was constructed.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [
    "Frequency band(s) and measurement instrumentation/method details are not provided in the abstract/excerpt.",
    "No information on number of measurement locations or sampling scheme is provided.",
    "No quantitative results of ANN model performance are provided in the abstract/excerpt.",
    "No explicit statement in the abstract/excerpt about whether measured levels were below/above ICTA/ICNIRP limits."
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "electric field",
    "EMF",
    "electromagnetic radiation",
    "exposure assessment",
    "university campus",
    "base station",
    "ANN",
    "ICNIRP",
    "ICTA",
    "exposure map"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.62,
      "reason": "Study evaluates measurements/estimates within limits defined by ICNIRP standards."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.17559/tv-20200418183308
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library