MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Release Limits and Decontamination Efficacy for Tritium: Lessons Learned Outside Nuclear Power Operations

2007· article· en· W2046092219 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward Waller, David J. Cole, Terry Jamieson

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman decontaminationSightNuclear materialNuclear powerRadiation monitoringProtocol (science)Agency (philosophy)Environmental scienceNuclear engineeringEngineeringWaste managementNuclear medicineMedicinePhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various pieces of equipment in use by the Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) contain radiation-emitting components. One such piece is a sight knob used on light artillery. At the request of the DND's Director General Nuclear Safety (DGNS-DND's internal nuclear regulatory agency), the authors were contacted to remove the luminous tritium-impregnated paint strip from over 300 sight knobs. This paper discusses the physical description of the sight knobs, the protocol developed for decontaminating the sight knobs, the rationale for the release limits used, and experience gained in using and modifying the decontamination protocol.

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 score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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