The Evolution of Gasses in Fire Suppression Systems to Promote Changes in Industrial Towards Global Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The historical development of fire suppression technology evolved in the 1930s since the application of Halons as a fire extinguishing agent. The fire may cause tremendous losses to organizations. It affects the chain of businesses and the stability of the economic growth of a country. The key issues of greenhouse effects and safety and health as well contributes to the sudden change of the technology of fire extinguishing systems. The establishment of the Montreal Protocol and Kyoto Protocols controls the producers to develop, supply and use of environmentally hazardous gasses worldwide. Hence, promote global sustainable for upcoming generations. This paper is highlighting the reasons gas type fire extinguishing agents extensively used substituting conventional methods against fire. The fundamental equations of Ozone Depleting Potential and Global Warming Potential were properly discussed to show how severe these gasses exposed to the environment. The effectiveness of these gases as a clean agent in extinguishing the fire may convince prospect users to carry out the decision of changes. Potential extinguishing agents will be deliberated to investigate their needs as new fire suppression agents. It will be then to be suggested and recommended for further studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".