MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071627518 · doi:10.1080/15459624.2012.693880

A Field Evaluation of the Physiological Demands of Miners in Canada's Deep Mechanized Mines

2012· article· en· W2071627518 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceMine safetyMining engineeringForensic engineeringCoal miningWaste managementMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted to evaluate the physical/mechanical characteristics of typical selected mining tasks and the energy expenditure required for their performance. The study comprised two phases designed to monitor and record the typical activities that miners perform and to measure the metabolic energy expenditure and thermal responses during the performance of these activities under a non-heat stress environmental condition (ambient air temperature of 25.8°C and 61% relative humidity with a wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) of 22.0°C). Six common mining jobs were evaluated in 36 miners: (1) production drilling (jumbo drill) (n = 3), (2) production ore transportation (load-haul dump vehicle) (n = 4), (3) manual bolting (n = 9), (4) manual shotcrete (wet/dry) (n = 3), (5) general services (n = 8) and, (6) conventional mining (long-hole drill) (n = 9). The time/motion analysis involved the on-site monitoring, video recording, and mechanical characterization of the different jobs. During the second trial, continuous measurement of oxygen consumption was performed with a portable metabolic system. Core (ingestible capsule) and skin temperatures (dermal patches) were recorded continuously using a wireless integrated physiological monitoring system. We found that general services and manual bolting demonstrated the highest mean energy expenditure (331 ± 98 and 290 ± 95 W, respectively) as well as the highest peak work rates (513 and 529 W, respectively). In contrast, the lowest mean rate of energy expenditure was measured in conventional mining (221 ± 44 W) and manual shotcrete (187 ± 77 W) with a corresponding peak rate of 295 and 276 W, respectively. The low rate of energy expenditure recorded for manual shotcrete was paralleled by the lowest work to rest ratio (1.8:1). While we found that production drilling had a moderate rate of energy expenditure (271 ± 11 W), it was associated with the highest work to rest ratio (6.7:1) Despite the large inter-variability in energy expenditure and work intervals among jobs, only small differences in average core temperature (average ranged between 37.20 ± 0.22 to 37.42 ± 0.18°C) were measured. We found a high level of variability in the duration and intensity of tasks performed within each mining job. This was paralleled by a large variation in the work to rest allocation and mean energy expenditure over the course of the work shift.

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)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.306 · 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