MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915233703 · doi:10.2172/1060182

Comparison of Results for Quarter 1 Surface Water Split Samples Collected at the Nuclear Fuel Services Site, Erwin, Tennessee

2012· report· en· W2915233703 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David A. King

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGroundwater and Isotope Geochemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConventional PCISample (material)Value (mathematics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Analytical Chemistry (journal)AnalyteMathematicsStatisticsEnvironmental scienceChemistryEnvironmental chemistryGeographyChromatographyArchaeologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), under the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) contract, collected split surface water samples with Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) representatives on August 22, 2012. Representatives from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation were also in attendance. Samples were collected at four surface water stations, as required in the approved Request for Technical Assistance number 11-018. These stations included Nolichucky River upstream (NRU), Nolichucky River downstream (NRD), Martin Creek upstream (MCU), and Martin Creek downstream (MCD). Both ORAU and NFS performed gross alpha and gross beta analyses. The comparison of results using the duplicate error ratio (DER), also known as the normalized absolute difference. A DER ≤ 3 indicates that, at a 99% confidence interval, split sample results do not differ significantly when compared to their respective one standard deviation (sigma) uncertainty. The NFS split sample report does not specify the confidence level of reported uncertainties. Therefore, standard two sigma reporting is assumed and uncertainty values were divided by 1.96. A comparison of split sample results, using the DER equation, indicates one set with a DER greater than 3. A DER of 3.1 is calculated for gross alpha results from ORAU sample 5198W0003 and NFS sample MCU-310212003. The ORAU result is 0.98 ± 0.30 pCi/L (value ± 2 sigma) compared to the NFS result of -0.08 ± 0.60 pCi/L. Relatively high DER values are not unexpected for low (e.g., background) analyte concentrations analyzed by separate laboratories, as is the case here. It is noted, however, NFS uncertainties are at least twice the ORAU uncertainties, which contributes to the elevated DER value. Differences in ORAU and NFS minimum detectable activities are even more pronounced. comparison of ORAU and NFS split samples produces reasonably consistent results for low (e.g., background) concentrations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGroundwater and Isotope GeochemistryFrench-language works237,207