Printed in Great Britain[ 99923767:88,08[999[99PII] S9992!3767"87#99968!8 Measuring Housekeeping in Manufacturing Industries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study involves the development and reliability evaluations of a checklist for measuring the state of housekeeping in industry [ The instrument was tested in _fty!nine companies in the transportation equipment and machinery manufacturing sector in Quebec \\ Canada \\ each employ! ing between twenty and sixty workers [ The checklist walk!through procedure usually required under thirty minutes [ For testretest reliability \\ a total of 010 comparisons were made based on visits made to the companies by one observer over the course of a year [ Results for visits made closer together in time were more reproducible "Intra!class correlation \\ ICC9[62 # than for those further apart in time "ICC9[44# [ The study also used alternate observers to test inter!observer reliability [ Inter!observer reliability was high "ICC9[77# [ Ease of use \\ time and effectiveness makes the checklist an attractive tool for company health and safety personnel [ 0888 British
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.886 | 0.754 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".