MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2351387765

Detection efficiency of alpha spectrometer for radon progeny measurement

2005· article· en· W2351387765 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Detao Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Techniques · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectrometerAlpha particleRadonAlpha-particle spectroscopyEnvironmental scienceEnergy (signal processing)PhysicsRadiochemistryChemistryNuclear physicsOpticsDetectorScintillation counter
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the measurement of radon daughters using alpha spectrometers, it is important to know the difference of detection efficiencies between higher energy α particle and lower one. The detection efficiencies of the ORTEC eight-channel alpha spectrometer working station for higher energy α particle and lower one are measured by an 241Am alpha standard source and a radon progeny standard source made by Canada Pylon Company, and the difference between the two was analyzed. The results show that the gross spectrum efficiencies of the two sources are equal within the deviations, and after the correction of the peak overlap the detection efficiency of α particle with higher energy is a little higher than that of the one with lower energy. So using radon progeny standard source is better than using 241Am source, because using radon progeny standard source to calibrate a device is more suitable to the practical radon progeny measurement situation than using 241Am.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear TechniquesSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207