MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954287936 · doi:10.5864/d2019-012

Public health investigation of swimming pool chlorine gas disinfection systems

2019· article· en· W2954287936 on OpenAlex
J. Ivor Norlin

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsInterior Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthHazardous wasteChlorine gasBusinessChlorineWaste managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental healthEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMedicineChemistryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In February 2012, a chlorine gas leak at a public pool facility in the British Columbia southern interior sent 70 people to hospital for assessment and treatment. As part of the follow-up investigation, the Interior Health (IH) public health engineering team undertook a comprehensive review of chlorine gas disinfection systems in public pools throughout the region. Deficiencies in the capacity to safely capture and release gas leaks were found in all 19 systems inspected. The engineering team subsequently worked with facility owners and area Environmental Health Officers to mitigate high-risk issues. However, less than half of the facilities were changed to on-site chlorine generation systems. Chlorine gas in public pool facilities poses an inherent risk to public health, and regional health authorities are responsible for routinely inspecting and overseeing these systems. The IH public engineering team continues to advocate for transitioning all public pool chlorine gas systems to less hazardous means of disinfection.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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