Respirable Dust and Respirable Silica Exposure in Ontario Gold Mines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive survey of respirable dust and respirable silica in Ontario gold mines was conducted by the Ontario Ministry of Labor during 1978-1979. The aim was to assess the feasibility of introducing gravimetric sampling to replace the assessment method which used konimeters, a device which gave results in terms of number of particles per cubic centimeter (ppcc) of air. The study involved both laboratory and field assessments. The field assessment involved measurement of airborne respirable dust and respirable silica at all eight operating gold mines of the time. This article describes the details of the field assessment. A total of 288 long-term (7-8 hr) personal respirable dust air samples were collected from seven occupational categories in eight gold mines. The respirable silica (α-quartz) was determined by x-ray diffraction method. The results show that during 1978-1979, the industry wide mean respirable dust was about 1 mg/m(3), and the mean respirable silica was 0.08 mg/m(3.)The mean% silica in respirable dust was 7.5%. The data set would be useful in future epidemiological and health studies, as well as in assessment of workers' compensation claims for occupational diseases such as silicosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and autoimmune diseases such as renal disease and rheumatoid arthritis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".