Which is better, a SCoTSS gamma imager, or an ARDUO UAV-borne directional detector?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The SiPM-based Compton Telescope for Safety and Security (SCoTSS) has been developed with inorganic crystalline scintillator material for gamma detection. The instrument is sensitive enough to be used in a mobile survey mode, accumulating energy deposited in any crystal second-by-second and tagging these spectra with GPS position. The SCoTSS imager of course has the additional advantage of being able to produce an image of the radioactive objects in its field of view using events that satisfy a coincidence trigger between the scatter and absorber layers. The Advanced Radiation Detector for UAV Operations (ARDUO) on the other hand, is a non-imaging directional detector intended for use aboard a small unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The ARDUO detector features exactly the same volume of CsI(Tl) as is used in the absorber layer of a single SCoTSS module, giving it similar detection and alarming sensitivity, and mapmaking capability. However, in the ARDUO detector, the crystals are arranged closely together to optimize direction determination from self-shielding effects. Flown in a grid pattern with a UAV over an area of extended contamination, the ARDUO detector is also capable of making a map or image of that area. With its close-packed crystal arrangement, the ARDUO detector makes a poor Compton imager but does have some ability to produce a peripheral image in a fly-by. In this presentation we investigate the relative merits of Compton imaging versus mobile directional detection.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".