MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004866279 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq199

Considerations in screeneing/measuring children with internal/external contamination

2010· article· en· W2004866279 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gary H. Kramer

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContaminationEnvironmental scienceRadioactive contaminationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Internal Radiation Assessment Section, which operates the Canadian National Calibration Reference Centre for Bioassay and In Vivo Monitoring, has field deployable equipment for emergency response. A substantial part of this toolkit is a set of portal monitors that can be used to quickly screen people into 'uncontaminated' and 'contaminated'. The former term refers to a person who has <60 kBq (empirical practical detection limit) of activation/fission products and the latter group is contaminated by that amount or more. Previous work has focused on how to process large numbers of people quickly and methodologies have been previously published; however, it was assumed that the group being monitored was composed of healthy adults. When applying these methods to children, a number of shortcomings have been identified.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207