MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027934558 · doi:10.1117/12.571946

Recent results from the standoff detection of radiological materials by passive FTIR radiometry

2004· article· en· W2027934558 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Eldon Puckrin, Jean‐Marc Thériault, Hugo Lavoie, Caroline S. Turcotte, Denis Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsRadiometryInfraredFourier transform infrared spectroscopyRadiological weaponRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceFourier transformMaterials scienceOpticsGeologyPhysicsChemistryRadiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past year we have initiated a study into the passive standoff detection of radiological materials by Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) radiometry. The preliminary work has shown that a number of radiological materials have an infrared signature in the 8-14 micron thermal infrared region. As well, through a series of simulations using the MODTRAN4 atmospheric transmission model, we have shown that these materials may potentially be detected at standoff distances of several kilometres. In this paper we present some results of our current work that focus on recent new measurements of spectral signatures, including the uranium oxides UO<sub>2</sub> and UO<sub>3</sub>. Preliminary results from a measurement campaign held at Defence Research and Development Canada-Valcartier this year are also presented which address the passive detection of radiological materials in the field at standoff distances of 10-60 m. These results are analysed in view of determining the potential for measuring nuclear products with a passive standoff FTIR technique.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.293
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 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207