Contamination and Decontamination of a Light Armoured Vehicle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiological decontamination experiments were carried out at the Defence School in Umea, Sweden, under the Swedish-Canadian accord. A Swedish light armoured vehicle was contaminated by driving it on a track upon which Sodium-24 in particulate form had been spread. The contamination pattern on the vehicle was characterized by a series of measurements with a Geiger-Mueller contamination probe and with Liquid Scintillation Counter measurements of swipes. A conventional high-pressure water spray, similar to that used by the Canadian Forces, was then used to decontaminate the vehicle. The contamination pattern on the vehicle was then re-measured. This procedure was then repeated with a new decontamination method, a forced pulsed water jet. The results of the two trials are compared herein. The two systems were found to produce similar results, with a slight edge going to the pulsed water jet system. It is important to note, however, that in both cases contamination remained on the vehicle, particularly in some of the wheel wells. Moreover, it was impossible to run the forced pulsed water jet system at a higher pressure without removing a significant fraction of the paint on the vehicle. These results indicate that water-based techniques alone are incapable of thoroughly decontaminating a vehicle, unless one is willing to operate at pressures high enough to remove paint, for example.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".