MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981725635 · doi:10.4095/296590

AMS / NRCan joint survey report, aerial campaign, Nevada National Security Site, January 20-24, 2014

2015· report· en· W2981725635 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Detection Methods
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)Aerial surveyRadiological weaponHomeland securityGeographyEnvironmental scienceCartographyEngineeringArchaeologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In January 2014 the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Aerial Measuring System (AMS) and the Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) Nuclear Emergency Response project conducted a series of joint surveys at a number of locations in Nevada including the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The goal of this project was to compare the responses of the two agencies' aerial radiation detection systems and data analysis techniques. This test included varied radioactive surface contamination levels and isotopic composition experienced at the NNSS and the differing data processing techniques utilized by the respective teams. Because both teams used the commercial aerial radiation detection systems from Radiation Solutions, Inc., the main focus of the campaign was to investigate the data acquisition techniques, data analysis, and ground-truth verification. The NRCan system consisted of four 4" x 4" x 16" NaI(Tl) scintillator crystals of which two were externally mounted in a modified commercial cargo basket certified for the Eurocopter AS350; the NNSA AMS system consisted of twelve 2" x 4" x 16" NaI(Tl) crystals in externally mounted dedicated pods. For NRCan, the joint survey provided an opportunity to characterize their system's response to extended sources of various fission products at the NNSS. Since both systems play an important role in their respective countries' national framework of radiological emergency response and are subject to multiple mutual cooperation agreements, it was important for each country to obtain more thorough knowledge of how they would employ these important assets and define the roles that they would each play in an actual response.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.212 · 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