Validation of on-site job-built guardrails with shoring jack as supports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To protect themselves against fall hazards in a slab-column frame, workers use the row of shoring jacks installed at 1 m from the edge as supports for on-site built guardrails. Inspectors of the Quebec Workers Compensation Board (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST)) have expressed concern about the safety and compliance of these on-site built guardrails with the Quebec Safety Code for the Construction Industry (S-2.1, r.4). Some workers have also inquired if the shoring jack can be used as an anchor for a travel restraint system. The present study describes how an evaluation method and a test protocol have been used to verify if guardrails built on-site, with shoring jacks as supports, are safe and comply with the requirements of S-2.1, r.4 and if the shoring jack can be used as an anchor point for a travel restraint system. The results of the study show 1) guardrails built on site with shoring jacks as supports, are safe and comply with S-2.1, r.4 and 2) shoring jacks used as supports for guardrails must not be used as an anchor for a travel restraint system. Para la protección contra el peligro de caída en altura durante la ejecución de la estructura de un edificio, los trabajadores utilizan puntales acodalados a dos forjados y situados a 1 metro del borde de forjado como apoyo de las barandillas de seguridad. Inspectores de la Quebec Workers Compensation Board (Commision de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (CSST)) han expresado su preocupación por la seguridad y el cumplimiento de estos sistemas de protección en la construcción conforme al Código de Seguridad de Quebec para la industria de la construcción (S-2.1, R.6). Así mismo algunos trabajadores han mostrado su inquietud sobre la utilización de los puntales como sistemas para limitar el desplazamiento. El presente estudio describe un método de evaluación y un procedimiento de ensayo que se han utilizado para verificar si las barandillas de seguridad apoyadas en puntales acodalados son seguras y cumplen con los requisitos de S-2.1, R.6; y si el puntal acodalado puede ser utilizado como punto de anclaje del sistema para limitar los desplazamientos. Los resultados del estudio muestran 1) las barandillas de seguridad apoyadas en puntales acodalados son seguras y cumplen con S-2.1, R.6 y 2) los puntales acodalados utilizados como apoyo de las barandillas de seguridad no deben ser usados como apoyos para sistemas con desplazamientos limitados.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".