Old Data—New Concepts: Integrating “Indirect Effects” Into Radiation Protection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To address the following key question, what are the consequences of nontargeted and delayed effects for linear nonthreshold models of radiation risk? This paper considers low-dose "indirect" or nontargeted effects and how they might impact radiation protection, particularly at the level of the environment. Nontargeted effects refer to effects in cells, tissues, or organisms that were not targeted by irradiation and that did not receive direct energy deposition. They include genomic instability and lethal mutations in progeny of irradiated cells and bystander effects in neighboring cells, tissues, or organisms. Low-dose hypersensitivity and adaptive responses are sometimes included under the nontargeted effects umbrella, but these are not considered in this paper. Some concepts emerging in the nontargeted effects field that could be important include historic dose. This suggests that the initial exposure to radiation initiates the instability phenotype which is passed to progeny leading to a transgenerational radiation-response phenotype, which suggests that the system response rather than the individual response is critical in determining outcome. CONCLUSION: Nontargeted effects need to be considered, and modeling, experimental, and epidemiological approaches could all be used to determine the impact of nontargeted effects on the currently used linear nonthreshold model in radiation protection.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it