Good Sleep Quality and Progressive Increments in Vigilance During Extended Night Shifts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Assess the change in sleep and vigilance of underground miners during long periods of extended shifts. METHODS: Seventy miners worked 14 consecutive 12-hour day and/or night shifts. Also, they wore an actigraph and completed a visual analog scale for vigilance four times per shift. Linear regression models with mixed effects were used. RESULTS: Sleep efficiency was higher during day shifts than during night shifts (86,5 vs 85.5, P < 0.05) but sleep duration did not differ (6:34 vs 6:44, n.s.). Mean vigilance level at Time 3 (02h00) was significantly lower than that at Time 1 (19h00) during the first 10 night shifts whereas mean vigilance level at Time 4 (05h30) remained significantly lower for the 14 night shifts. CONCLUSIONS: Underground miners exhibit good sleep quality despite evidence of limited circadian adaptation in terms of nighttime vigilance.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".