An Ergonomic Assessment of Manual Planting <i>Pinus Radiata</i> Seedlings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This report summarises findings of an ergonomic evaluation of manual planting under three different site conditions. Heart rate data were collected and analysed using several heart rate indices. The three sites did not differ greatly, producing mean working heart rates that ranged from 132.7 bt.min-1 (± 16.2) to 134.9 bt.min-1 (± 13.8). Results indicate that manually planting Pinus radiata seedlings on all three sites can be classified as “hard continuous work” or “very heavy work”. Planters maintained similar mean working heart rates for all three sites by decreasing productivity as planting conditions became more difficult. Body part discomfort was only experienced when planting on pasture, where slight to severe discomfort was reported 48% of the time. Hazard occurrence was low for all three site 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it