Evaluation of Standard and Prototype Protective Garments for Wildland Firefighters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two prototype protective clothing systems for wildland firefighters were developed for comparison with protective clothing systems currently used by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The four types of protective clothing systems, in two different sizes, were tested for protective capabilities on the thermal mannequin at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. An average heat flux of 80 KW/m2 and an exposure time of 4 seconds were used to simulate a wildland flash fire. A two-way analysis of variance indicated that differences in fit did not produce significant differences in burn injuries. However, it should be noted that the difference in fit in this study was relatively small. The differences in type of garment system were significant; all of the two-layer systems were significantly more protective than the one-layer system. Design features that appeared to increase thermal protection included an adjustable collar, zipper guard and reduction in loose edges on the protective shirt.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.011 | 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".