CS2 LPA-D03-PROTECTED: Evaluation of a next generation oxygen system – assessment of usability, comfort and human performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of an oxygen system has many crucial aspects regarding usability, comfort, and its effects on human performance. To overcome shortcomings of common systems, a new oxygen mask was developed. It was aimed at enhancing the devices’ comfort and ease of use and at enabling the interoperability of the oxygen system within the cockpit environment. The project was a cooperation between the German Aerospace Center (DLR) and Safran Aerosystems (Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking framework). Our aim was to evaluate the new oxygen system with the parts oxygen mask and human-machine interface and to compare it to a customary system. Experiments using 20 pilots were conducted in two demonstrators providing the two oxygen systems. The procedure included normal cruise flight operation and emergency scenarios. Data were assessed by use of computerized questionnaires and cognitive performance tasks. Results showed that subjects were more satisfied with the usability and the comfort of the new mask at all three measurement time points. Cognitive performance with the new mask was not significantly impaired compared to the customary (legacy) mask. Differential effects and conclusions for the further development process are discussed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".