MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Costs of Reprocessing versus Directly Disposing of Spent Nuclear Fuel

2007· article· en· W24011110 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Peter R. Orszag

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsSpent nuclear fuelWaste managementRadioactive wasteNuclear fuel cycleHigh-level wasteNuclear fuelEnvironmental scienceNuclear engineeringDecay heatEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to test for measurement invariance and examine differences in global self-concept between adolescents with and without physical illness or developmental disability. The sample consisted of adolescents 10-19 years who participated in the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (N=8491). Multiple group confirmatory factor analysis was used to test for measurement invariance. Twenty-three percent (n=1966) of participants had a physical illness or developmental disability. Support was found for strict measurement invariance between groups suggesting adolescents in both groups perceived items similarly, indicating that comparisons between adolescents with and without physical illness or developmental disability are meaningful. Controlling for several sociodemographic characteristics, evidence suggested that self-concept is lower in adolescents with physical illness or developmental disability, β=-0.24, p=0.0005, compared to their healthy peers. Future work should attempt to understand the processes leading to compromised self-concept in adolescents with physical illness or developmental disability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AdolescenceSame topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207