MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158512361 · doi:10.1093/rpd/nct068

Radiation quality of tritium: a comparison with 60Co gamma rays

2013· article· en· W2158512361 on OpenAlexaff
J. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTritiumRelative biological effectivenessRadiochemistryGamma rayRange (aeronautics)Deposition (geology)RadiationIrradiationTritiated waterCobalt-60ChemistryDosimetryMaterials scienceNuclear physicsNuclear medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a previous study, microdosimetric simulations were performed for tritium uniformly distributed in a medium, and for tritium bound to biologically critical sites of dimensions from 10 nm to 2 µm. Results of local energy density, i.e. energy deposition in microscopic regions, are different for these two cases. Based on the spatial distribution of energy deposition, dose mean lineal energies are calculated for tritium in the forms of tritiated water (HTO) and organically bound tritium (OBT). The dose mean lineal energies of OBT are about a factor of 1.7 higher than those of HTO in a wide range of target dimensions of biological interest. The results are consistent with radiobiological findings that OBT is about twice as effective as HTO. In this study, the same calculations were performed for (60)Co gamma rays in a wide range of target dimensions of biological interest (10 nm to 2 µm). Compared with (60)Co gamma rays, the estimated relative biological effectiveness could vary from 1.3 to 3.5 for HTO, and 2.3 to 5.6 for OBT. The results are consistent with radiobiological findings for various biological endpoints in different biological systems that OBT is about twice as effective as HTO.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207