MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225006939 · doi:10.18280/mmep.090203

COVID-19 Distribution Predicting in Nursing Caring Office Room: A Case Study at Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Medical Center

2022· article· en· W4225006939 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Prapada Watcharanat, Ponthep Vengsungnle, Paisarn Naphon

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCOVID-19 impact on air quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)AirflowSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineVentilation (architecture)Social distance2019-20 coronavirus outbreakAir pollutantsAir movementNursingAir pollutionVirologyGeographyMeteorologyEngineeringInfectious disease (medical specialty)PathologyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risk of spreading the virus largely depends on the airflow behavior and the change in direction caused by the air supply and location of the exhaust air. The generated particles may travel long during sneezing, adversely affecting human bodies to defend against COVID-19 infectious diseases. This paper examines airflow path and airborne pollutant distribution in the nursing caring office room for COVID-19 patients ward at Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Medical Center, Nakhornnayok province by computational fluid dynamics modeling and field measurement. Fifteen dummies of nursing staff stay in the room, and only one dummy (Patient) generated COVID-19. It is found that the generated particles during sneezing may travel a long distance as compared with the normal respiration and the ventilation system can effectively remove contaminants from the room and distribution in the room. From the obtained results, the keeping a social distancing should be more than 1.5 m for preventing the spread of the COVID-19 from person to person.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicCOVID-19 impact on air qualityFrench-language works237,207