MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014019660 · doi:10.1029/2019jc015544

Guidelines and Limits for the Quantification of Ra Isotopes and Related Radionuclides With the Radium Delayed Coincidence Counter (RaDeCC)

2020· article· en· W3014019660 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Diego‐Feliu, Valentí Rodellas, Aaron Alorda‐Kleinglass, Joseph Tamborski, Pieter van Beek, L. Heins, J.M. Bruach, Ralph Arnold, Jordi García-Orellana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGroundwater and Isotope Geochemistry
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadGeneralitat de CatalunyaAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsRadiumCoincidenceRadionuclideIsotopeNuclear medicineRadiochemistryEnvironmental scienceChemistryNuclear physicsMedicinePhysicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Radium Delayed Coincidence Counter (RaDeCC) is one of the most extensively used equipment for measuring 223Ra and 224Ra activities in water and sediment samples. Samples are placed in a closed He‐circulation system that carries the Rn produced by the decay of Ra to a scintillation cell. Each alpha decay recorded in the cell is routed to an electronic delayed coincidence system which enables the discrimination of 223Ra and 224Ra. In this study, the measurement and quantification methods using the RaDeCC system are assessed through analyses of registered data in different RaDeCC systems worldwide and a set of simulations. Results of this work indicate that the equations used to correct for 223Ra and 224Ra cross‐talk interferences are only valid for a given range of activities and ratios between isotopes. Above certain limits that are specified in this study, these corrections may significantly overestimate the quantification of 223Ra and 224Ra activities (up to ~40% and 30%, respectively), as well as the quantification of their parents 227Ac and 228Th. High activities of 226Ra may also produce an overestimation of 224Ra activities due to the buildup of 222Rn, especially when long measurements with low activities of 224Ra are performed. An improved method to quantify 226Ra activities from the buildup of 222Rn with the RaDeCC system is also developed in this study. Wethus provide a new set of guidelines for the appropriate quantification of 223Ra, 224Ra, 227Ac, 228Th, and 226Ra with the RaDeCC system.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations42
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicGroundwater and Isotope GeochemistryFrench-language works237,207