MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1819745842

The new CSA Z94-2 standard hearing protection devices - Performance, selection, care and use

2002· article· en· W1819745842 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alberto Behar, Dave Shanahan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHearing protectionPercentileStandard deviationTest (biology)Computer scienceStatisticsMathematicsAudiologyMedicineHearing loss
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Section 6, Test Procedures, specifies that tests should be performed as per AN SI Standard S12.6, although test results as per ANSI Standard S3.19 aie also accepted. The test procedure to be used is the Method B, that is a Rcal-car attenuation at threshold (REAT) procedure, where protectors arc fit by the subjects that arc persons not familiar with the use of protectors (naive subjects). Results from the test are reported as octave band data. Those data arc used to compute the Single Number Rating (Subject Fit 84 Percentile), abbreviated SNRCSFsm) that provides a nominal 84% protection confidence interval (i.e., 84% of the users in a well-run hearing conservation program arc expected to receive at least that much protection). The procedure for the calculation of SNR(SF84 ) is in Appendix A of the Standard. Using the SNR(SFS4 ) data, a Grade will be assigned to the protector, as per Table 2. If, however, data from measurements using the procedure in ANSI Standard S3.19 are used, then and attenuation class will be assigned as per Table 3 in the Standard. The Force Measurement of the headband is compulsory for muffs. However, the Physical Performance Tests described in the Standard are optional. Section 7, Packaging Information is of especial interest to manufacturers. The following three sections: Section 8. Selection, Care and Use: Overview and General Requirements, Section 9, Selection of Hearing Protection Devices and Section 10, Fit, Care and Use of Hearing Protection Devices are most important for users and health and safety professionals, sincc they deal with issues fundamental for an efficient use of protectors in the workplace. This information is complemented with Section 11, Implementation, that is a guide on how to introduce protectors in the workplace in such a way that they are used efficiently. Sections 8 through 11 include information such as sound attenuation, attenuation at frequency extremes, double protection, overprotection, etc. Their content will be helpful to anyone writing Heal ing Protection Program in the workplace. The last Section 12, Specialized Hearing Protection Devices, is a guide into tire nonconventional types of hearing protectors, their characteristics and applications. It includes active protection devices (ANR headsets), protectors with linear attenuation, sound restoration, frequency sensitive, etc. The Standard, 49 pages long, is available from the Canadian Standard Association whose web site iswww.csa.ca

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.072

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207