MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4302386876 · doi:10.5957/icetech-2010-180

Lifeboat Habitability and Effects on Human Subjects

2010· article· en· W4302386876 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan T. Power, António J. Simões Ré

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Coastal Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkin temperatureHabitabilityEnvironmental scienceAeronauticsEngineeringMarine engineeringPlanetPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lifeboats are the most used marine evacuation craft in both the shipping and offshore industries. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) Lifesaving Appliances (LSA) code does not have criteria for the manoeuvring performance of lifeboats nor for their habitability and effects on human subjects. During standard seakeeping exercises conducted with a SOLAS approved 20-person lifeboat in Conception Bay, NL two NRC employees (coxswain and assistant) wearing certified immersion suit systems had their skin temperature, deep body temperature, and heart rate measured while performing their assigned duties. During the morning of July 24th, 2009, the outside air temperature was 14°C and the water temperature was approximately 7.6°C, with little to no cloud cover. While piloting the lifeboat with the hatches closed, the interior temperature of the lifeboat rose from 19.4°C to 28.5°C over the course of approximately two hours. With the immersion suits fully zipped, the coxswain experienced an increase in mean skin temperature of 3.4°C, while the assistant’s rose by 2.7°C. The coxswain’s mean body temperature rose by 0.74°C, and the assistant’s by 1.0°C. After the two-hour time period, both the coxswain and assistant’s clothing were heavily soaked with sweat, and both reported moderate levels of thermal discomfort due to the heat. In the afternoon of the same day, with little to no cloud cover, the outside air and water temperatures registered 15°C and 8.78°C, respectively. For the afternoon trials, the lifeboat hatches were left open, and the immersion suits were unzipped. Over a two-hour period, the interior temperature of the lifeboat rose by only 0.2°C, the coxswain’s mean skin temperature rose by 0.5°C, and the assistant’s by 0.5°C. After the two hour afternoon session was completed, both the coxswain and the assistant reported little to no thermal discomfort with the interior temperature of the lifeboat. Based on these preliminary observations, prolonged occupancy of a sealed lifeboat with a high level of clothing insulation may lead to increased thermal stress on the evacuees.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and Coastal ResearchFrench-language works237,207