Internal dosimetry: towards harmonisation and coordination of research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The CONRAD Project is a Coordinated Network for Radiation Dosimetry funded by the European Commission 6th Framework Programme. The activities developed within CONRAD Work Package 5 ('Coordination of Research on Internal Dosimetry') have contributed to improve the harmonisation and reliability in the assessment of internal doses. The tasks carried out included a study of uncertainties and the refinement of the IDEAS Guidelines associated with the evaluation of doses after intakes of radionuclides. The implementation and quality assurance of new biokinetic models for dose assessment and the first attempt to develop a generic dosimetric model for DTPA therapy are important WP5 achievements. Applications of voxel phantoms and Monte Carlo simulations for the assessment of intakes from in vivo measurements were also considered. A Nuclear Emergency Monitoring Network (EUREMON) has been established for the interpretation of monitoring data after accidental or deliberate releases of radionuclides. Finally, WP5 group has worked on the update of the existing IDEAS bibliographic, internal contamination and case evaluation databases. A summary of CONRAD WP5 objectives and results is presented here.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it