MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898583130 · doi:10.1109/ppic.2018.8502231

Enhanced Productivity in Forest Product Industries with Lockout/Tagout Alternatives

2018· article· en· W2898583130 on OpenAlexaff
John Kay, George K. Schuster

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsRockwell Automation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityIncentiveBusinessProduct (mathematics)Work (physics)Risk analysis (engineering)Environmental economicsOperations managementEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lockout/tagout (LOTO) unquestionably saves lives in forest products manufacturing and processing segments, but it can also be a drain on productivity. Additionally, some types of diagnostic and setup work require active power sources, which can lead to workers bypassing LOTO procedures. LOTO alternative protective measures (APM) that are compliant with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Minor Servicing Exception (MSE), present an opportunity to enhance productivity and help reduce the incentive for workers attempting to bypass critical safety procedures. This paper will explore the use of LOTO APMs, how they can improve productivity, their safety and financial benefits, and the consideration of appropriate locations for their use.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207