Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract NFPA 660, Standard for Combustible Dusts and Particulate Solids , became effective on December 6, 2024. This standard is the product of an effort, extending over a decade, to make the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) requirements for the safe handling of combustible dust, easier for the user to understand and apply. This effort began in March 2011 and was complete in the fall of 2024, with the publishing of NFPA 660. The result, NFPA 660, is organized into chapters establishing requirements fundamental to all combustible dusts, followed by individual chapters providing additional requirements specific to each industry or commodity. In this article, the authors draw on their experiences working on multiple NFPA committees, conversations with committee members, and reviews of the NFPA 660 with multiple stakeholders, to describe the organization of the standard, provide a high‐level summary of the requirements, and share major updates and changes from previous combustible dust standards. Readers will gain an understanding of the requirements, learn what changes will need to be made to existing programs already in compliance with previous standards, and know how to navigate the standard to find the information they need to ensure safe operation of facilities processing and handling combustible dusts.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it