MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146893882 · doi:10.1109/pcicon.1999.806426

The impact of the IECEx scheme on the global availability of explosion protected apparatus

2003· article· en· W2146893882 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Brenon, Paul T. Kelly, K. McManama, U. Klausmeyer, Wei Shao, Peggy B. Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationScheme (mathematics)Perspective (graphical)Product (mathematics)Risk analysis (engineering)Product certificationHazardous wasteComputer scienceComputer securitySystems engineeringBusinessEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The IECEx scheme is structuring a system to achieve global acceptance for explosion protected equipment for hazardous locations. Scheme members declare that they will abolish national differences for product requirements in their countries during the coming years. The international scheme will greatly impact the free trade of explosion protected apparatus needed for the petrochemical and chemical industry if the scheme members recognize and accept harmonized worldwide IEC standards. The goal is to develop and maintain uniform product evaluation to protect users against products which are not in line with the required level of safety. The critical aspects are identified by a comparison of advantages and disadvantages of such a scheme. The experience with the European system of Notified Bodies and harmonized CENELEC standards is a good basis for consideration during the phase of establishing the IECEx Scheme. The result of fast introduction of IEC standards can be visualized by specifying possible conflicts in the national regulations. This paper addresses this issue from the perspective of four international certification organizations-PTB (providing an overview of the scheme), UL (providing a US perspective), CSA (providing a Canadian perspective) and LCIE (providing a European perspective).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207