Evaluating the Physiological Performance of a Liquid Cooling Garment Used to Control Heat Stress in Hazmat Protective Ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this study was to evaluate the physiological performance of a liquid cooling garment in controlling heat stress in individuals wearing Hazmat protective ensembles. Five heat-acclimated male subjects completed three trials each: standard work clothing (WC), Hazmat suit (H), and a Hazmat suit with torso cooling (HC). All testing took place in an environmental chamber (35°C and 50 % relative humidity) with subjects walking on a treadmill at a metabolic rate of 300 W. Trials were performed until subjects completed the maximum 90 min, achieved the predetermined endpoints in core temperature (38.5°C) or heart rate (95 % of age predicted maximum), or symptoms of fatigue, disorientation, and discomfort forced the participant to discontinue or the researchers to end the test. A significant difference (P<0.05) between HC and H was found in final heart rate and core temperature (Tre), rate of change in heart rate and Tre, and exposure time. As well, HC was similar to WC in all measured physiological variables. It was concluded that a liquid cooling vest was beneficial in alleviating the heat stress caused by Hazmat protective ensembles.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".