MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138373378 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncu267

Further considerations for the setting up of a low background whole-body counter for internal dosimetry at Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Carlsbad, NM, USA: transmitted photon component

2014· article· en· W2138373378 on OpenAlexafffund
I. Pillalamarri, P. Jagam

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of GuelphU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsElectromagnetic shieldingPhotonDosimetryPhysicsRadioactive wasteNuclear physicsDetectorFlux (metallurgy)Work (physics)Environmental scienceNuclear engineeringNuclear medicineOpticsMaterials scienceMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the further considerations in the present work, while setting up a low background whole-body counter (WBC) underground at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is to reduce the background in the energy region of interest <100 keV. The goal of the present work is to determine the adequacy of a chamber located underground at WIPP of dimensions 1.83 m × 1.22 m at the base, 1.83 m high, with 15 cm thick pre-world-war II steel shielding. The objective of the present work is to estimate the transmitted photon flux into this chamber for setting up the low background WBC. The transmitted photon flux is simulated with the GEANT code for an incident photon flux consisting only of 1461 keV photons. The results are discussed with respect to a detector of choice for detecting <50 mBq emitting photons in the energy region <100 keV.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207