MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Human Monitoring Laboratory’s Whole Body Counter: Monitoring the Liquid Nitrogen Level as a Quality Control Tool

2007· article· en· W2063899261 on OpenAlexaff
Gary H. Kramer, Barry M. Hauck

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiquid nitrogenControl chartChartEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringComputer scienceChemistryMathematicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Human Monitoring Laboratory (HML) has developed a method to measure the liquid nitrogen boil-off rate from the whole body counter's single dewar as a function of time. The device consists of a commercially available instrument that was modified to fit the HML's whole body counter's dewar; unfortunately, the modification was not perfect requiring an alternative approach to using the maximum fill value. The boil-off rate is now measured by taking two measurements and calculating the loss rate. Resulting boil-off rates are plotted on a control chart so that long-term trends can be easily assessed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.338 · 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.

Study designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PhysicsSame topicHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringFrench-language works237,207