MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Radiation Protection Issues Related to Canadian Museum Operations

2008· article· en· W1989095475 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward Waller, David J. Cole, Terry Jamieson

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation protectionRadiationBusinessEnvironmental scienceMedicineNuclear medicinePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Museums in Canada have been found to possess radioactive items. The origin of the radiation can be broadly categorized as either natural (generally, radioactive ores) or anthropogenic (generally, luminous gauges). Radioluminescent gauges, especially bearing radium (226Ra), can also generate significant radiation fields. This is especially true if many gauges are located in close proximity. In addition, the radon may out-gas from these gauges, and generate a loose contamination problem in enclosed spaces (such as display cases). Radioactive ores, bearing naturally occurring uranium and thorium, can generate radiation fields many times greater than the ambient background levels. In addition, they will increase the ambient radon level and potentially generate loose contamination. In this paper, we discuss the specific results of radiological decommissioning at three museums: the National Air Force Museum of Canada (Trenton, Ontario); the Quebec Air and Space Museum (Montreal, PQ); and the Canadian Museum of Nature (Aylmer, PQ). In addition, a radiological survey performed at Canadian Forces Detachment Mountain View (Mountain View, Ontario) of surplus aircraft is included. The primary conclusion is that museums holding radioactive materials may have detectable levels of loose Ra and progeny contamination. They, therefore, have a requirement to be surveyed for loose contamination periodically with the potential for periodic decontamination caused by radon out-gassing. In addition, public access to displays bearing radioactive material should generally be restricted, and comprehensive radiation safety and security programs at museum facilities should be developed and enacted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0120.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PhysicsSame topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207