Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study is to address the spacial composition of a standard ward and bedroom size for sake of infection control and efficient medical service. Methods: Spacial composition of a standard ward has been proposed by comparative analysis of 5 big hospitals' wards. Bedroom sizes have been explored on the ground of Health care facility regulations from Korea, USA, Australia and Canada. Of course, Literature and field survey have been conducted in order to draw out various bedroom sizes. Results: 16 basic and some other additional spaces have been proposed for the composition of hospital standard ward. Area of Single bedroom is 11.6㎡, and that of multi-beded room is 7.4㎡. Bed to bed Clearance is 1.5m, spacing between bedsize and hard wall is 0.9m in 1~2 beded room, 0.75m in 4-beded room. Space clearance between Foot side of bed and curtain is proposed as 0.3m and additional 0.9m is necessary for the circulation. Implications: The result of this study can be applied to the new cons.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".