MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989824584

Calculating the reliability of a zero-energy state system

2024· article· en· W6989824584 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical Fault Detection and Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazardous wasteReliability (semiconductor)Control (management)ResidualState (computer science)Risk assessmentWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada and other industrialized countries, workers who are required to carry out tasks in the hazardous zone of a machine when performing repairs, maintenance or unjamming activities must follow lockout procedures, unless safe alternative methods exist and can be applied. In Quebec the occupational health and safety regulation has been updated recently and several articles have been added on lockout procedures. That regulation allows for alternative control methods in addition to the traditional lockout/tagout, as long as the risk assessment deems the residual risk level to be acceptable. In Canada the CSA Z460 standard in the control of hazardous energies is viewed as a reference in the area. Lockout procedures have been extended to the construction sector for the control of hazardous energies as well. The lockout procedure consists of the following steps: stopping the equipment, isolating the energies, applying individual locks, dissipating residual energies, and verifying the absence of energies. Lockout procedures require lockout devices as well as training and audits. An important step in the lockout procedure is the verification step. Workers often neglect that step for various reasons. This article focuses on the use of dedicated safety electronic systems as an alternative to achieving a zero-energy state. These systems, rather than eliminating energy, control it to ensure workers’ safety. They are characterized by their reliability and typically involve safeguards such as interlocking devices, safety scanners, light curtains, and other safety mechanisms, during operational tasks. The article also introduces a method for calculating the reliability of these zero-energy-state system, based on the ISO 13849 standard. This method aims to help businesses comply with both the local regulation and the CSA Z460 standard. It builds upon the work of Poisson et al. (2016) [1], who calculated a zero-energy-state system in scenarios involving complex energy return recuperation systems. This innovative approach could potentially replace the need for voltage testing or machine startups following a lockout procedure. This development is particularly relevant given the increased complexity of modern machinery and the challenges in ensuring that no other energy sources that could harm workers are present post-lockout. This approach could significantly change how businesses ensure worker safety and regulatory compliance.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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