MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Shortage of Technetium-99m and Possible Solutions

2020· article· en· W3034165467 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortageAtomic energySubsidyProduction (economics)Agency (philosophy)BusinessNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceEconomicsGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following a major shortage of 99 Mo in the 2009–2010 period, concern grew that the aging reactor production facilities needed to be replaced. Most producers were using highly enriched 235 U (HEU) as the target material. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Atomic Energy Agency sought to remedy these issues by removing HEU from medical isotope production and implementing full cost recovery to enable new production entities to compete with the existing multipurpose reactor facilities, which were heavily subsidized by their respective governments. This review examines the various approaches to producing 99 Mo and/or 99m Tc with a critical eye toward their potential success in ( a) producing the medical isotopes and ( b) being able to successfully enter and compete in the market. Because many of the new approaches are adapting existing technologies for commercial businesses, some of the details are of a proprietary nature and not available for in-depth technical review.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.308 · 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