MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066064467 · doi:10.1088/0952-4746/21/1/610

A Critical Review of the System of Radiation Protection. First Reflections of the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency's Committee on Radiation Protection and Public Health (OECD/NEA, 2000)

2001· review· en· W2066064467 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joe McHugh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Radiological Protection · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Atomic energyRadiation protectionHealth protectionPolitical sciencePublic healthPublic administrationCollective doseMedicineEnvironmental healthSociologyNuclear medicineSocial scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Nuclear Energy Agency's (NEA's) Committee on Radiation Protection and Public Health (CRPPH) has a wide remit to consider, offer informed expert views, and develop ideas on topical issues in radiation protection. In 1999 the CRPPH set up a working group to examine Roger Clarke's initiative on `controllable dose', and on the use of collective dose. Some CRPPH members had expressed concern over the use of collective doses when integrated over long time periods and very large populations. Antonio Susanna of ANPA chaired the group; Tony Bandle and I attended from the UK and there were other members from Ireland, France, USA, Canada, Hungary, Finland, Germany Switzerland, Japan and the OECD.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Radiological ProtectionSame topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207