MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007562006 · doi:10.1063/1.3275662

Cosmic Ray Inspection and Passive Tomography for SNM Detection

2009· article· en· W2007562006 on OpenAlexafffundabout
J.C. Armitage, D. Bryman, Thomas E. Cousins, G. Gallant, Andrew J. Jason, Guy Jonkmans, Gerald Oakham, Trevor J. Stocki, D. Waller, K. Baharuth-Ram

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)Carleton UniversityPublic Safety CanadaBentley (Canada)Advanced Applied Physics SolutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaHealth Canada
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsScintillatorMuonTracking (education)DetectorPhysicsCosmic rayThroughputNuclear decommissioningPort (circuit theory)Container (type theory)Nuclear engineeringNuclear physicsComputer scienceOpticsMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cosmic Ray Inspection and Passive Tomography (CRIPT) project has recently started investigating the detection of illicit Special Nuclear Material in cargo using cosmic ray muon tomography and complementary neutron detectors. We are currently performing simulation studies to help with the design of small scale prototypes. Based on the prototype tests and refined simulations, we will determine whether the muon tracking system for the full scale prototype will be based on drift chambers or extruded scintillator trackers. An analysis of the operations of the Port of Montreal has determined how long muon scan times should take if all or a subset of the cargo is to be screened. As long as the throughput of the muon system(s) is equal to the rate at which containers are unloaded from ships, the impact on port operations would not be great if a muon scanning stage were required for all cargo. We also show preliminary simulation results indicating that excellent separation between Al, Fe and Pb is possible under ideal conditions. The discrimination power is reduced but still significant when realistic momentum resolution measurements are considered.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicParticle Detector Development and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207