Poster - Thur Eve - 54: Radiotherapy and Non-Radiotherapy Safety Practices Beyond Licensing Expectations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) regulates the use of nuclear energy and materials to protect the health, safety and security of Canadians and the environment, and to implement Canada's international obligations on the peaceful use of nuclear energy. In order to perform this regulatory activity, the CNSC issue licences and has its staff perform inspections to verify conformity to the aspects of those licences. Within the CNSC, the Accelerators and Class II Facilities Division (ACFD) is responsible for the regulatory oversight of Class II Prescribed Equipment used in medical, academic, and industrial sectors in Canada. In performing inspections, ACFD has encountered licensees with practices that are either below, meet or exceed regulatory expectations in specific areas. Unfortunately, none of these practices are ever communicated to the broader Class II community to help other licensees avoid the same problem or achieve high standards. In this poster, ACFD will highlight safety practices that go beyond expectations. These practices are taken from observations during site inspections between 2007 and 2013 and will be presented in six areas: Procedures, Participation, Awareness, Equipment, Servicing and Software. Each area briefly discusses a number of practices that the CNSC feels went beyond the expectations dictated by the licence. Where possible, names are added of the contact people at the centres who can be reached for full details of their implementations. It is hoped that this communication will assist other licensees to achieve these same high levels of compliance and possibly go beyond.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.014 |
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".