MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036295157 · doi:10.12943/cnr.2019.00003

ISSUES AND CHALLENGES IN ASSESSING ECOLOGICAL AND HUMAN HEALTH RISK FROM THE SITING OF SMRS IN CANADA

2020· article· en· W3036295157 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David J. Rowan

Bibliographic record

VenueCNL Nuclear Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticBaseline (sea)Human healthAgency (philosophy)Temperate climateWildlifeEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcologyEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental planningEnvironmental healthFisheryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many issues and challenges in assessing ecological and human health risk from siting small modular reactors (SMRs) in northern or Arctic regions. Environmental guidance for Canadian nuclear facilities is largely derived from data and models relevant to temperate regions, with no explicit guidance or parameters for northern regions. International Atomic Energy Agency guidance provides some data and parameters for northern regions, but there remains a paucity of data and models. Although wildlife often comprise a major part of northern and Arctic diets, there are few data or transfer parameters for these ecosystems. Data and transport models are available for weapon test and Sellafield/La Hague fission products in northern oceans, but very little is known about circulation or fate and transport in estuarine and coastal areas typical of northern Canada. Baseline data, parameters, and models are needed for key processes and pathways to accurately assess ecological and human health risk.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNL Nuclear ReviewSame topicRadioactive contamination and transferFrench-language works237,207