Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Workplace Safety and Health Branch initiated a proactive study in the welding industry in Manitoba. Eight welding companies participated in this study. Health concerns raised by welders were welders' flash, sore/red/teary eyes, headaches, nosebleeds, and a black mucous discharge from their nasal membrane. Most welders expressed concern regarding excessive smoke levels in the workplace and inadequate ventilation. Types of welding identified were MIG mild steel, MIG stainless steel, and TIG aluminum. Monitoring involved an assessment of noise levels, fume composition, and carbon monoxide and ozone concentrations. Metal analyses were according to National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Method 7300. Noise dosimeters used were the Quest model 100 and Micro 14 & 15. Carbon monoxide was monitored using the Gastech Model 4700 and ozone using the AID Portable Ozone Meter Model 560. In Manitoba, a hearing conservation program is required when the equivalent sound exposure level (normalized Lex 8-hr) exceeds 80 dBA-weighted. The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' threshold limit value-time weighted average (ACGIH TLV-TWA) for iron is 5.0 mg/m3, manganese is 0.2 mg/m3, carbon monoxide is 25 ppm, and ozone is 0.05 ppm (heavy work), 0.08 ppm (moderate work), and 0.1 ppm (light work). Welders' personal exposures to manganese ranged from 0.01-4.93 mg/m3 (N = 42; AM = 0.5; GM = 0.2; SD +/- 0.9; GSD +/- 3.2) and to iron ranged from 0.04-16.29 mg/m3 (N = 42; AM = 3.0; GM = 1.4; SD +/- 3.5; GSD +/- 2.5). Noise exposures ranged from 79-98 dBA (N = 44; AM = 88.9; GM = 88.8; SD +/- 4.2; GSD +/- 1.0). Carbon monoxide levels were less than 5.0 ppm (at source) and ozone levels varied from 0.4-0.6 ppm (at source). Ventilation upgrades in the workplace were required in most welding shops. Only 7 percent of the welders wore respiratory protection. A hearing conservation program and hearing protection were required at all monitored workplaces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".