MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036991579 · doi:10.1118/1.2031022

Sci‐AM Fri ‐ 06: Boxes, locks and talks: Making Class II compliance in a regulated environment

2005· article· en· W2036991579 on OpenAlexaffabout
M Evans, F DeBlois, W Abdel‐Rahman, Robert Corns, EB Podgorsak

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditCertificationOfficerMedicineMedical physicsOperations managementComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringPolitical scienceAccountingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Class II facilities in general and cancer centers running a radiation therapy program in particular, are being subjected to increasingly more rigorous regulation by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). The mission of the CNSC to regulate the use of nuclear energy and materials to protect health, safety, security and the environment can sometimes run counter to the day‐to‐day reality of running a cancer clinic. The recent division of our hospital radiation safety program into two distinct components: Class II (radiotherapy) and other (diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, research and laboratories, and consolidated), resulted in a significant improvement in the organization and delivery of radiation safety services. Performing the duties of a Class II Radiation Safety Officer to meet compliance requires a delicate balance of paper‐pushing and common sense: two activities that are often at odds with each other. License activities covered by CNSC document C‐120, such as applications and renewals as well as annual compliance reports, will be discussed. Devices we have installed to facilitate compliance for teletherapy and brachytherapy (HDR and manual) licenses will be presented. Procedures accepted by the CNSC for in‐house leak testing and survey meter calibration (R‐116 and R‐117) and suggestions for facilitating CNSC inspections and audits will also be discussed. Finally, a description of our approach to meeting several recent compliance requirements by the CNSC Nuclear Security Division (within the scope of Prescribed Information limitations) at our cancer center will be reviewed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207