Review of Regulations and Guides for Excavation and Trenches—Comparison with the Québec Safety Code for the Construction Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With all serious and fatal accidents occurring every year in excavation and trench work worldwide, governmental authorities recognize the dangerous nature of excavation and trench work. Regulations have been written containing a series of measures to be followed in order to protect workers in excavation and trench work. This paper sums up a review of regulations and guides in excavation and trench work of several countries. All involve a soil classification based on the description of the soils and the hydraulic conditions and the adoption of safe slopes based on the classification, while, in its current version, the Québec Safety Code for the Construction Industry (S-2.1, r.6) does not mention this important information. Thus, there is a need to update section 3.15.3 of S-2.1, r.6. Since a proposal for soil classification, taking into account the impact of the soft sensitive clay in Québec was not accepted by the review committee of S-2.1, r.6 in 1989, a research project will be submitted soon for funding to review section 3.15.3 of S-2.1, r.6.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".