An investigation of the<sup>109</sup>Cd -ray induced K-x-ray fluorescence (XRF) bone-lead measurement calibration procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two sets of phantoms have been used to calibrate a 109Cd y-ray induced K-XRF bone-lead measurement system. Both sets of phantoms are made of plaster of Paris, but the calibration lines are significantly different. This results in a significant difference for the derived concentrations of bone lead for the same person using these two sets of phantoms. This study shows that the different calibration lines are due to the different compositions of the phantoms, which can then be accounted for by adjusting the parameters related to the phantom composition in spectral analysis. Bone-lead concentrations for ten lead-exposed smelter workers were computed before and after analysis modification, and the results show that the bone-lead concentrations for the same person calculated from two sets of phantoms are not significantly different, only after the modifications are incorporated. Through these investigations, it was discovered that a common practice of setting the ratio of the calcium edge amplitude to the coherent scatter amplitude as a constant is only valid when all spectra are acquired at the same system resolution. When there is a change in the resolution between spectra, it has been determined that the ratio of the calcium edge amplitude to the coherent area should instead be used as the constant factor in the analysis program.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".