MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119105093 · doi:10.1051/radiopro/2002084

Transfer of radionuclides to fruits : The activities of the biomass fruits working group

2002· article· en· W2119105093 on OpenAlexaff
C. J. Atkinson, F. Carini, C. Matilda Collins, P. J. Coughtrey, K. Eged, M.J. Fulker, N. Green, R. Kinnersley, Igor Linkov, N.G. Mitchell, C. Mourlon, Zitouni Ould-Dada, J.M. Quinault, B. Robles, Alan J. W. Stewart, L. Sweeck, Albert Venter

Bibliographic record

VenueRadioprotection · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic University
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
KeywordsRadioecologyRadionuclideAtomic energyEnvironmental scienceBiosphereBiomass (ecology)Radiological weaponAgency (philosophy)ChemistryRadiochemistryEcologyBiologyPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the potential radiological significance of the transfer of radionuclides to fruit, a Fruits Working Group was set up in 1997 within the framework of the Programme on BIOsphere Modelling and ASSessment (BIOMASS), promoted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and in co-operation with the International Union of Radioecology (IUR). The aim of this working group was to improve understanding of the processes affecting the migration of radionuclides in fruit systems and to identify uncertainties associated with modelling the transfer of radionuclides to fruit. The main activities of the Fruits Working Group included : (i) a review of experimental, field and modelling information on the transfer of radionuclides to fruit ; (ii) a derivation of a fruit conceptual model ; (iii) a database of model parameters ; (iv) a collection of additional information from experimental studies ; (v) model intercomparison studies ; and (vi) a validation study. This paper presents an overview of the main activities and results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadioprotectionSame topicRadioactive contamination and transferFrench-language works237,207