An update on thoron exposure in Canada with simultaneous 222Rn and 220Rn measurements in Fredericton and Halifax
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Naturally occurring isotopes of radon in indoor air are identified as the second leading cause of lung cancer after tobacco smoking. Radon-222 (radon gas) and radon-220 (thoron gas) are the most common isotopes of radon. While extensive radon surveys have been conducted, indoor thoron data are very limited. To better assess thoron exposure in Canada, radon/thoron discriminating detectors were deployed in 45 homes in Fredericton and 65 homes in Halifax for a period of 3 months. In this study, radon concentrations ranged from 16 to 1374 Bq m(-3) with a geometric mean (GM) of 82 Bq m(-3) and a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 2.56 in Fredericton, and from 4 to 2341 Bq m(-3) with a GM of 107 Bq m(-3) and a GSD of 3.67 in Halifax. It is estimated that 18 % of Fredericton homes and 32 % of Halifax homes could have radon concentrations above the Canadian indoor radon guideline of 200 Bq m(-3). This conclusion is significantly higher than the previous estimates made 30 y ago with short-term radon measurements. Thoron concentrations were below the detection limit in 62 % of homes in both cities. Among the homes with detectable thoron concentrations, the values varied from 12 to 1977 Bq m(-3) in Fredericton and from 6 to 206 Bq m(-3) in Halifax. The GM and GSD were 86 Bq m(-3) and 3.19 for Fredericton, and 35 Bq m(-3) and 2.35 for Halifax, respectively. On the basis of these results, together with previous measurements in Ottawa, Winnipeg and the Mont-Laurier region of Quebec, it is estimated that thoron contributes ∼8 % of the radiation dose due to indoor radon exposure in Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".