MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132399762 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/20146610018

Event based neutron activation spectroscopy and analysis algorithm using MLE and metaheuristics

2014· article· en· W2132399762 on OpenAlexaff
Barton Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceAlgorithmIdentification (biology)Particle swarm optimizationNeutron activation analysisMetaheuristicDetectorExperimental dataData miningPhysicsMathematicsNuclear physicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Techniques used in neutron activation analysis are often dependent on the experimental setup. In the context of developing a portable and high efficiency detection array, good energy resolution and half-life discrimination are difficult to obtain with traditional methods [1] given the logistic and financial constraints. An approach different from that of spectrum addition and standard spectroscopy analysis [2] was needed. The use of multiple detectors prompts the need for a flexible storage of acquisition data to enable sophisticated post processing of information. Analogously to what is done in heavy ion physics, gamma detection counts are stored as two-dimensional events. This enables post-selection of energies and time frames without the need to modify the experimental setup. This method of storage also permits the use of more complex analysis tools. Given the nature of the problem at hand, a light and efficient analysis code had to be devised. A thorough understanding of the physical and statistical processes [3] involved was used to create a statistical model. Maximum likelihood estimation was combined with metaheuristics to produce a sophisticated curve-fitting algorithm. Simulated and experimental data were fed into the analysis code prompting positive results in terms of half-life discrimination, peak identification and noise reduction. The code was also adapted to other fields of research such as heavy ion identification of the quasi-target (QT) and quasi-particle (QP). The approach used seems to be able to translate well into other fields of research.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207