A new bomb-combustion system for tritium extraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative extraction of tritium from a sample matrix is critical to efficient measurement of the low-energy pure beta emitter. Oxidative pyrolysis using a tube furnace (Pyrolyser) has been adopted as an industry standard approach for the liberation of tritium (Warwick et al. in Anal Chim Acta 676:93–102, 2010 ) however pyrolysis of organic-rich materials can be problematic. Practically, the mass of organic rich sample combusted is typically limited to <1 g to minimise the possibility of incomplete combustion. This can have an impact on both the limit of detection that can be achieved and how representative the subsample is of the bulk material, particularly in the case of heterogeneous soft waste. Raddec International Ltd (Southampton, UK), in conjunction with GAU-Radioanalytical, has developed a new high-capacity oxygen combustion bomb (the Hyperbaric Oxidiser; HBO 2 ) to address this challenge. The system is capable of quantitatively combusting samples of 20–30 g under an excess of oxygen, facilitating rapid extraction of total tritium from a wide range sample types.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".