Can the HML's sliced BOMAB phantom be used in any whole body counter with a reduced number of sources?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sliced Bottle Manikin Absorber (BOMAB) phantom was originally proposed as an alternative to a commercially available phantom, but it suffers from the disadvantage of containing over 160 sources that need to be manufactured; however, it was found that the number of slices could be reduced substantially and that two slices in the sliced phantom gave the same performance characteristics over a wide energy range as a conventional BOMAB phantom for a particular counting system. This work explores the adaptability of this phantom to another counting geometry. The response of the Human Monitoring Laboratory's whole-body counter measuring this phantom with a decreasing number of planar sources has been modelled using MCNP5 over a wide energy range (122-2754 keV). It was found that the best agreement was obtained when the phantom contained 10 sources, 1 in the mid point of each section. As this is a different result from a previous finding, any other counting geometry will have to be assessed to determine the optimum loading if the sliced phantom is to be used. Also, it is clear that this type of phantom cannot be used for an intercomparison that will encounter different counting geometries, unless it contains a full loading of sources.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".