MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130707735 · doi:10.3233/wor-203412

Identification of physically fatiguing tasks performed during aircraft open-basket ground de-icing activities

2021· article· en· W3130707735 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tiphaine Le Floch, Sylvie Nadeau, François Morency, Kurt Landau

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIcingAirplaneWork (physics)SimulationEngineeringAeronauticsEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMeteorologyMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Airplane de-icing technicians work from either an open-basket or closed-basket. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to identify the tasks that have an influence on the physical fatigue of open-basket aircraft de-icing technicians. METHODS: In a Canadian airport during the winter of 2016-2017, a field study was conducted in which the heart rate of 12 volunteer participants was collected. The data was analyzed along with the 22 tasks that make up the activity of open-basket aircraft de-icing. For each participant, the mean absolute cardiac cost per task was compared. The evolution of the cardiac signal based on the resting heart rate and steady state limit was also characterized. RESULTS: According to the cumulative results fatigue occurs for periodic tasks as well as double tasks. More precisely, the most physically fatiguing tasks are spraying de-icing and anti-icing fluids, moving the basket and truck, as well as tactile control and de-icing quality control at ground level. CONCLUSIONS: Similar studies would need to be conducted in other aircraft de-icing facilities to improve the generalization of the results.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorkSame topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207