Interdisciplinary perspectives on dose limits in radioactive waste management. A research paper developed within the ENTRIA project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
aiming at a synthesis of the technical, sociology of knowledge, legal, societal, and political aspects of dose limits within the field of radioactive waste management. In this paper, the ENTRIA project is briefly introduced and the work on dose limits is put into the perspective of this much larger project. Selected aspects of the ENTRIA work on dose limits related to the different roles such limits play for different actors as well as to the specific case of nuclear waste disposal are presented. The work recognizes that such limits are indispensable for technological developments and legal security but, at the same time, depend on country and project specific circumstances. This may result in serious conflicts and concerns in public debates as well as in the political realm. In order to better understand the interaction and interdependencies of these various contexts in which debates about dose limits play out, future interdisciplinary research is needed. This research should contribute to an open discourse on dose limits which reflects underlying values, objectives, actors and procedures that have defined present dose limit regimes. Additionally, this research should indicate paths for potential alternatives and complements to these established regimes.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".