Applied ergonomics · 2026
A supervised machine learning approach to predict core temperature for workers with high-level personal protective equipment.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Coehoorn Cory J, Fernandes Cory J, Alomani Mohammed, Townsend Parker, Cowart Hannah, Lalonde James
Аннотация
UNLABELLED: This study assesses machine-learning approaches to predict core temperature (Tc) in workers wearing high-level personal protective equipment (PPE), hypothesizing improved accuracy over conventional methods.
METHODS: Fifty participants (48 male, 2 female) performed exercise protocols while wearing high-level PPE in one of two conditions (NORM [n = 14]: 25-26°C, 45% humidity, HYPR [n = 36]: 35-36°C, 45-50% humidity). The variables collected were skin temperature (Tsk), heart rate (HR), time, respiratory rate (RR), and rate of skin temperature acquisition per minute (Tsk/min). A total of 4063 data points were utilized in two separate, complementary supervised machine learning analyses (random forest [RF] and generalized additive models [GAM]). Model performance was evaluated using both leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) cross-validation and an observation-level 80/20 split (80/20). The two models' performance was measured using adjusted R2, bias, limits of agreement (LoA), root mean squared error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and standard error of the estimate (SEE).
RESULTS: LOSO approach: GAM model (R2 of 0.84, a bias of 0.00, a 95% LoA [-0.50°C, 0.50°C], an RMSE of 0.26°C, an MAE of 0.21°C, and a SEE of 0.26°C), RF model (R2 of 0.84, a bias of 0.01, a 95% LoA [-0.50°C, 0.50°C], an RMSE of 0.26°C, an MAE of 0.20°C, and a SEE of 0.26°C). 80/20 approach: GAM model (R2 of 0.89, a bias of 0.00, a 95% LoA [-0.41°C, 0.41°C], an RMSE of 0.21°C, an MAE of 0.17°C, and a SEE of 0.21°C), RF model (R2 of 0.96, a bias of 0.00, a 95% LoA [-0.26°C, 0.26°C], an RMSE of 0.13°C, an MAE of 0.09°C, and a SEE of 0.21°C).
CONCLUSION: Supervised machine learning approaches can effectively predict Tc among workers wearing high-level PPE.
METHODS: Fifty participants (48 male, 2 female) performed exercise protocols while wearing high-level PPE in one of two conditions (NORM [n = 14]: 25-26°C, 45% humidity, HYPR [n = 36]: 35-36°C, 45-50% humidity). The variables collected were skin temperature (Tsk), heart rate (HR), time, respiratory rate (RR), and rate of skin temperature acquisition per minute (Tsk/min). A total of 4063 data points were utilized in two separate, complementary supervised machine learning analyses (random forest [RF] and generalized additive models [GAM]). Model performance was evaluated using both leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) cross-validation and an observation-level 80/20 split (80/20). The two models' performance was measured using adjusted R2, bias, limits of agreement (LoA), root mean squared error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and standard error of the estimate (SEE).
RESULTS: LOSO approach: GAM model (R2 of 0.84, a bias of 0.00, a 95% LoA [-0.50°C, 0.50°C], an RMSE of 0.26°C, an MAE of 0.21°C, and a SEE of 0.26°C), RF model (R2 of 0.84, a bias of 0.01, a 95% LoA [-0.50°C, 0.50°C], an RMSE of 0.26°C, an MAE of 0.20°C, and a SEE of 0.26°C). 80/20 approach: GAM model (R2 of 0.89, a bias of 0.00, a 95% LoA [-0.41°C, 0.41°C], an RMSE of 0.21°C, an MAE of 0.17°C, and a SEE of 0.21°C), RF model (R2 of 0.96, a bias of 0.00, a 95% LoA [-0.26°C, 0.26°C], an RMSE of 0.13°C, an MAE of 0.09°C, and a SEE of 0.21°C).
CONCLUSION: Supervised machine learning approaches can effectively predict Tc among workers wearing high-level PPE.