MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

USE OF THE METHOD OF ELECTRON PARAMAGNETIC RESONANCE FOR DETERMINATION OF ABSORBED DOSES OF IONIZING RADIATION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MEAT AND FISH RAW MATERIALS

2017· article· en· W2810292709 on OpenAlex
Тимакова Р.Т., Tikhonov S.L., Tikhonova N.V., Poznyakovskiy V.M.

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods and raw materials · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRadiation Effects and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonizing radiationAbsorbed doseFish <Actinopterygii>Electron paramagnetic resonanceChemistryFood scienceRadiation doseRadiochemistryDosimetryIrradiationNuclear magnetic resonanceNuclear medicineMedicineBiologyFisheryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine the absorbed doses of ionizing radiation of food, it is recommended to use the method of electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), but, at the same time, determination method improvement is necessary. The objective of the study is improvement of the technique of sample preparation and analysis of the obtained results by means of quantitative estimation of the absorbed doses of ionizing radiation on the basis of EPR spectrum parameters, case study is irradiated meat and fish. Bone tissue samples (BTS) of meat and fish were subject to irradiation processing with ionizing radiation in the following doses: 3, 9, 10, 12 kGy with UELR-10-10C2 linear electron accelerator with energy up to 10 MeV. Study of the irradiated samples was performed with the automated portable X-band EPR spectrometer of the brand Labrador Expert. The improved technique of preparation of bone tissue samples for analysis differs with the increased duration of drying - up to 24 hours, which allows to obtain the stable EPR spectra in multiple replications. Correlation dependence of EPR signal area increase and irradiation dose is determined: for beef it is 0.98, for pork it is 0.98, for poultry it is 0.996 and for fish it is 0.99. Strong statistical relationship between the irradiation dose and the absorbed dose is determined: for beef it is 0.94, for pork it is 0.94, for poultry it is 0.96 and for fish it is 0.94. Processing of EPR spectra of meat and fish BTS by means of amplitudecalculation and EPR peak width and area allows to determine the absorbed dose with a high degree of confidence (p ≤ 0.05). For bone tissue of pork, beef, poultry and fish, irradiated with the dose of 12 kGy, amplitude is 4.8∙10-4, 5.08∙10-4, 1.11∙ 10-4 and 3.44∙10-5 p.u., peak area is - 6.73∙ 10-3, 6.94∙10-3, 3.68∙10-3 and 3.07∙10-3.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.248 · 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