Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of private and public insurers compensate workers whose hearing loss can be directly attributed to excessive exposure to noise in the workplace. The claim assessment process is typically lengthy and requires significant effort from human adjudicators who must interpret hand-recorded audiograms, of- ten sent via fax or equivalent. In this work, we present a solution developed in partnership with the Workplace Safety Insurance Board of Ontario to streamline the adjudication process. In particular, we present the first audiogram digitization algorithm capable of automatically extracting the hearing thresholds from a scanned or faxed audiology report as a proof-of-concept. The al- gorithm extracts most thresholds within 5 dB accuracy, allowing to substantially lessen the time required to convert an audiogram into digital format in a semi-supervised fashion, and is a first step towards the automation of the adjudication process. The source code for the digitization algorithm and a desktop-based imple- mentation of our NIHL annotation portal is publicly available on GitHub https://github.com/GreenCUBIC/AudiogramDigitization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".