MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Protection From Steam at High Pressures: Development of a Test Device and Protocol

2008· article· en· W2011207074 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteam injectionHeat transferWork (physics)Test (biology)Transfer (computing)EngineeringProtocol (science)Materials scienceNuclear engineeringMechanical engineeringPetroleum engineeringStructural engineeringWaste managementComposite materialComputer scienceMechanicsMedicineGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive use of pressurized steam in the oil and gas sectors has led to incidents where workers were seriously injured. In this study a test device and procedure to measure heat transfer through fabrics during steam exposure were developed and evaluated. Several factors were considered while designing the test device to simulate work site conditions. Fabrics were exposed to steam at 2 distances (50 and 100 mm) and 2 pressures (207 and 69 kPa). Theoretical considerations included heat and mass transfer, and fabric structure and performance properties. The test device and procedure differentiated well among both fabrics and exposure conditions. For all fabrics, maximum heat transfer was observed at highest steam pressure and shortest distance. Laminated and coated fabrics performed better than a fabric without such treatments.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.259 · 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