MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2390244954

Construction and Development of Emergency Refuge System in Underground Mine

2010· article· en· W2390244954 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCoal science and technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSafety and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoal miningAutomatic summarizationChinaMining engineeringEngineeringMine safetyCivil engineeringEmergency managementEmergency responseForensic engineeringEnvironmental planningConstruction engineeringCoalGeographyWaste managementComputer scienceMedical emergencyArchaeologyPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the construction requirements of the emergency refuge system of the mine safety refugesix major systemin China underground coal mines,based on study and references on the successful construction and application experiences of the underground mine emergency refuge system in USA,South Africa,Canada and other overseas countries,the paper had a systematic analysis on the features as well as the research and development of the function position,composition and basic mode,and mobile escape cabin for the underground mine emergency system.Meanwhile the paper had a detail analysis and summarization on the related issues to be noted in the underground mine emergency refuge system to be constructed in China.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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