MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2467221151 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncw161

Radiation Dose Estimation by Automated Cytogenetic Biodosimetry

2016· article· en· W2467221151 on OpenAlexaff
Peter K. Rogan, Yanxin Li, Ruth C. Wilkins, Farrah Flegal, Joan H.M. Knoll

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear LaboratoriesHealth CanadaCytodiagnostics (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodosimetryDicentric chromosomeMass CasualtyIonizing radiationCalibration curveNuclear medicineTriageCalibrationMetaphaseRadiationRadiation doseMedicineBiologyChromosomeIrradiationPhysicsOpticsMathematicsStatisticsKaryotypeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dose from ionizing radiation exposure can be interpolated from a calibration curve fit to the frequency of dicentric chromosomes (DCs) at multiple doses. As DC counts are manually determined, there is an acute need for accurate, fully automated biodosimetry calibration curve generation and analysis of exposed samples. Software, the Automated Dicentric Chromosome Identifier (ADCI), is presented which detects and discriminates DCs from monocentric chromosomes, computes biodosimetry calibration curves and estimates radiation dose. Images of metaphase cells from samples, exposed at 1.4-3.4 Gy, that had been manually scored by two reference laboratories were reanalyzed with ADCI. This resulted in estimated exposures within 0.4-1.1 Gy of the physical dose. Therefore, ADCI can determine radiation dose with accuracies comparable to standard triage biodosimetry. Calibration curves were generated from metaphase images in ~10 h, and dose estimations required ~0.8 h per 500 image sample. Running multiple instances of ADCI may be an effective response to a mass casualty radiation event.

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207