MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2307306105 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncw054

INADEQUACY OF THORON DOSE CALCULATIONS FROM THORON PROGENY MEASUREMENT ALONE

2016· article· en· W2307306105 on OpenAlexaff
Derek Lane-Smith, Franklin Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceIonizing radiationRadiationRadiation doseNuclear medicineAbsorbed doseRadiochemistryAtmospheric sciencesChemistryMedicineNuclear physicsPhysicsIrradiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pb atoms) and calculate the dose by using a set of conversion factors. This may be due to the measurement of progeny being simpler since it is longer lived and will be evenly spread throughout the room, whereas the thoron gas, with its short half-life, will exist only near the source and hence will not be of major concern for the majority of the room. However, concrete walls are a source of thoron, and spending prolonged amounts of time near them may lead to greatly increased radiation exposure, the degree of which is not revealed through progeny activity alone. The present paper compares the energy received from the ionising radiation of both thoron gas and thoron progeny near its source. Converting the energy dose to radiation dose is not within the scope of this paper. The results suggest a difference of an order of magnitude higher when taking into account the dose received by thoron gas.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207