MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001761868 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncu021

A survey of the urban radiofrequency (RF) environment

2014· article· en· W2001761868 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceRidgePower (physics)HistoryGeographyComputer scienceCartographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1980, Tell and Mantiply published a study of radiofrequency (RF) fields measured across 15 major metropolitan areas in the USA. They required a van fully equipped with instrumentation and computing capability for their measurements. This study aimed to assess whether and how hand-held instrumentation available today would facilitate and enhance the efficiency of large-scale surveys of ambient RF fields. In addition, the data would provide a suggestion as to how the profile of ambient RF fields has changed with respect to frequency content and magnitude. Not unexpectedly, the relative power densities were orders of magnitude lower than the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) maximum permissible exposure (MPE) for the general public, with a maximum time-averaged value across the VHF-FM-UHF-cellular bands of 0.12 % of the MPE (AM's contribution was negligible). In both the 1980 and the present study, the power density in the FM band was a major contributor to overall power density, but over time, power densities in the VHF and UHF band decreased and increased, respectively. From the perspective of absolute power density, the wideband values in the 1980 study, this study and any number of assessments conducted in European nations are not generally different from one another.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.174 · 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