Simultaneous 222Rn and 220Rn measurements in Winnipeg, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Naturally occurring isotopes of radon in indoor air are identified as the second leading cause of lung cancer after tobacco smoking. Winnipeg had the highest radon ((222)Rn) concentration among 18 Canadian cities surveyed in the past. There is great interest to know the current radon as well as thoron ((220)Rn) concentrations in Winnipeg homes. Therefore, radon-thoron discrimination detectors were deployed in 117 houses for a period of 3 months. The results confirmed that thoron is present at detectable levels in about half of the Winnipeg homes and radon remains significantly higher than the national average. In this study, radon concentrations ranged from 20 to 483 Bq m(-3) with a geometric mean of 112 Bq m(-3) and a geometric standard deviation of 2.07. It is estimated that 20% of Winnipeg homes could have radon concentrations above the Canadian indoor radon guideline of 200 Bq m(-3). This conclusion is similar to the previous estimation made 20 y ago. Thoron concentrations were below the detection limit in 60 homes. Among the homes with detectable thoron concentrations, the values varied from 5 to 297 Bq m(-3), the geometric mean and standard deviation were 21 Bq m(-3) and 2.53, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".