Sensitivity and uncertainty in the measurement of H*(10) in neutron fields using an REM500 and a multi-element TEPC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The REM500 is a commercial instrument based on a tissue-equivalent proportional counter (TEPC) that has been successfully deployed as a hand-held neutron monitor, although its sensitivity is regarded by some workers as low for nuclear power plant radiation protection work. Improvements in sensitivity can be obtained using a multi-element proportional counter design in which a large number of small detecting cavities replace the single large volume cavity of conventional TEPCs. In this work, the authors quantify the improvement in uncertainty that can be obtained by comparing the ambient dose equivalent measured with a REM500, which utilises a 5.72 cm (2(1/4) inch) diameter Rossi counter, with that of a multi-element TEPC designed to have the sensitivity of a 12.7 cm (5 inch) spherical TEPC. The results obtained also provide some insight into the influence of other design features of TEPCs, such as geometry and gas filling, on the measurement of ambient dose equivalent.
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".