MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164320520 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq046

An updated assessment of radon exposure in Canada

2010· article· en· W2164320520 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadonNova scotiaRadon exposureEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental healthPopulationGeographyGuidelineMedicineArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on data from a national residential radon survey performed in 18 cities in Canada in the 1970s, an annual effective dose to the Canadian population due to indoor radon exposure was estimated at 0.71 mSv. An updated estimate of radon exposure in Canada has been made using additional indoor radon data from recent surveys in Ontario and Nova Scotia, and in 28 communities of British Columbia and 15 regions of Quebec. The associated annual effective dose to the Canadian population is now estimated to be 1.15 mSv. The percentage of homes in Canada with radon concentrations above the Canadian Radon Guideline of 200 Bq m(-3) is estimated to be about 3.3 %. As might be expected, this number varies significantly (from a low of 1 % of homes above the Guideline to a high of 19 %) from region to region. Because more radon data are included in the current assessment, and the data set covers broader geographical areas, the current assessment better represents the radon exposure in Canada.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.336 · 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