Conductive Heat Exchange with a Gel-Coated Circulating Water Mattress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of forced-air warming is associated with costs for the disposable blankets. As an alternative method, we studied heat transfer with a reusable gel-coated circulating water mattress placed under the back in eight healthy volunteers. Heat flux was measured with six calibrated heat flux transducers. Additionally, mattress temperature, skin temperature, and core temperature were measured. Water temperature was set to 25 degrees C, 30 degrees C, 35 degrees C, and 41 degrees C. Heat transfer was calculated by multiplying heat flux by contact area. Mattress temperature, skin temperature, and heat flux were used to determine the heat exchange coefficient for conduction. Heat flux and water temperature were related by the following equation: heat flux = 10.3 x water temperature - 374 (r(2) = 0.98). The heat exchange coefficient for conduction was 121 W . m(-2) . degrees C(-1). The maximal heat transfer with the gel-coated circulating water mattress was 18.4 +/- 3.3 W. Because of the small effect on the heat balance of the body, a gel-coated circulating water mattress placed only on the back cannot replace a forced-air warming system.
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".