Thermal effects of dorsal head immersion in cold water on nonshivering humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personal floatation devices maintain either a semirecumbent flotation posture with the head and upper chest out of the water or a horizontal flotation posture with the dorsal head and whole body immersed. The contribution of dorsal head and upper chest immersion to core cooling in cold water was isolated when the confounding effect of shivering heat production was inhibited with meperidine (Demerol, 2.5 mg/kg). Six male volunteers were immersed four times for up to 60 min, or until esophageal temperature = 34 degrees C. An insulated hoodless dry suit or two different personal floatation devices were used to create four conditions: 1) body insulated, head out; 2) body insulated, dorsal head immersed; 3) body exposed, head (and upper chest) out; and 4) body exposed, dorsal head (and upper chest) immersed. When the body was insulated, dorsal head immersion did not affect core cooling rate (1.1 degrees C/h) compared with head-out conditions (0.7 degrees C/h). When the body was exposed, however, the rate of core cooling increased by 40% from 3.6 degrees C/h with the head out to 5.0 degrees C/h with the dorsal head and upper chest immersed (P < 0.01). Heat loss from the dorsal head and upper chest was approximately proportional to the extra surface area that was immersed (approximately 10%). The exaggerated core cooling during dorsal head immersion (40% increase) may result from the extra heat loss affecting a smaller thermal core due to intense thermal stimulation of the body and head and resultant peripheral vasoconstriction. Dorsal head and upper chest immersion in cold water increases the rate of core cooling and decreases potential survival time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".