MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070901788 · doi:10.5558/tfc84539-4

The human factor in forest operations: Engineering for health and safety

2008· article· en· W2070901788 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jeremy Rickards

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Human engineeringHuman healthScience and engineeringOccupational safety and healthHuman resourcesEngineeringBusinessEngineering ethicsMedicinePolitical scienceEnvironmental healthSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human Factors Engineering is an interdisciplinary science concerned with the effect of work on the human body and its relationship to the workplace. Since the 1970s, UNB – Forest Engineering has been a major contributor to teaching and research in this discipline, and in its application to forest operations. Rapid advances in mechanized tree-harvesting systems resulted in significant new workplace issues for operator health, safety, and machine design. Researchers responded by creating a CSA standard, working cooperatively with FERIC, CPPA and more recently the CWF, and founding the International Journal of Forest Engineering, which is a unique source for research results and developments in this discipline. Future research will involve multi-national teams of Human Factors Engineers, supported by related disciplines in healthcare and engineering. Key words: human factors, forest engineering, workplace health, workplace safety, mechanized forest operations

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementFrench-language works237,207