MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167087193 · doi:10.1109/tns.2009.2019271

Simulations of a Scintillator Compton Gamma Imager for Safety and Security

2009· article· en· W2167087193 on OpenAlexaff
L.E. Sinclair, D. S. Hanna, A.M.L. MacLeod, P.R.B. Saull

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMcGill UniversityGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScintillatorDetectorPhysicsMonte Carlo methodOpticsGamma rayAngular resolution (graph drawing)Compton scatteringMedical physicsNuclear engineeringNuclear physicsPhotonEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are designing an all-scintillator Compton gamma imager for use in security investigations and remediation actions involving radioactive threat material. To satisfy requirements for a rugged and portable instrument, we have chosen solid scintillator for the active volumes of both the scatter and absorber detectors. Using the BEAMnrc/EGSnrc Monte Carlo simulation package, we have constructed models using four different materials for the scatter detector: LaBr3, NaI, CaF2, and PVT. We have compared the detector performances using angular resolution, efficiency, and image resolution. We find that while PVT provides worse performance than that of the detectors based entirely on inorganic scintillators, all of the materials investigated for the scatter detector have the potential to provide performance adequate for our purposes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations57
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207