MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965835167 · doi:10.1080/15459620500340822

Occupational Exposure Limits: An Approach and Calculation Aid for Extended Work Schedule Adjustments

2005· article· en· W1965835167 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas W. Armstrong, Daniel J. Caldwell, Dave K. Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork scheduleOccupational exposure limitToxicantWork (physics)Occupational exposureLimit (mathematics)ToxicokineticsComputer scienceReliability engineeringToxicologyOperations researchPharmacokineticsEngineeringChemistryPharmacologyMedicineMathematicsToxicityBiologyEnvironmental healthMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past reviews of occupational exposure limit (OEL) adjustments have covered both decision logic and calculation methods to derive factors to assure protection of workers on extended (also known as unusual) work shifts. The approaches reviewed included several Haber's rule based methods, several variants of single compartment toxicokinetic (TK) models, and physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling. These models calculate OEL adjustment factors based on the work shift and the uptake and elimination of the toxicant. A key parameter of the TK models is the biologic half-life of the toxicant, but reliable data for the half-life are not available for all substances of concern. A spreadsheet is presented that implements TK calculations, with one of the presented TK calculation alternatives not dependent on half-life data. This half-life data independent approach is suggested as a viable option for situations when the toxicant's half-life is unknown or uncertain.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Environmental HygieneSame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207