International Outdoor Experiments and Models for Outdoor Radiological Dispersal Devices
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the advent of nuclear reactors and the technology to produce radioactive materials in large quantities, concern arose about the use of radioactivity as a poison in warfare, and hence, consideration was given to defensive measures (Smyth 1945). Approximately forty years later, the interest in the environmental- and health effects caused by a deliberate dispersal was renewed, but this time, from the perspective of a malevolent act of radiological terrorism in an urban area. For many years there has been international collaboration in scientific research to understand the range of effects that might result from a device that could be constructed by a sub-national group. In this paper, scientists from government laboratories in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States collectively have conducted a myriad of experiments to understand and detail the phenomenology of an explosive radiological dispersal device.
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 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 it