MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755373683 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncx162

AN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION BY USING AN ALL-ENCOMPASSING PASSIVE RADON MONITOR

2017· article· en· W2755373683 on OpenAlexaffabout
L. Tommasino, J. Chen, R. Falcomer, Mirosław Janik, R. Kanda, F DeFelice, F. Cardellini, Rosabianca Trevisi, Federica Leonardi, Mauro Magnoni, Enrico Chiaberto, Giovanni Agnesod, Massimo Faure Ragani, G. Espinosa, J.I. Golzarri, Krzysztof Kozak, J. E. Mazur

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadonEnvironmental scienceTap waterHealth hazardRemote sensingEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental healthGeologyPhysicsMedicineNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recently developed radon film-badge makes it possible to measure radon indoors, in soil, in water and/or in aqueous media (e.g. mud). As a result of its wide response linearity, this monitor has been successfully used to measure radon in-water with concentrations from 10 to ~10 000 Bq/L. By exploiting the unique characteristics of this badge, a mini-survey has been carried out by Health Canada in which radon in water was measured from 12 private wells, as well as in tap water originating from the Ottawa River. Due to the widespread interest of different laboratories in using these passive monitors, laboratories were provided with plastic films to construct their own badges by using in-house CR-39 detectors. Monitors were then irradiated by a known radon concentration at the National Institute of Radiation Metrology (ENEA)'s radon chamber and sent back to each laboratory for processing and counting. Even though these laboratories have been using different etching- and counting-procedures, the film-badge responses varied only within ~12%.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207