MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037034291 · doi:10.2172/1580759

AMS/DSA Joint Survey Report

2020· report· en· W3037034291 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel B. Haber, Russell Malchow, Jezabel Stampahar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)Computer scienceEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In April 2018, the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Aerial Measuring System (AMS) and the Norwegian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (DSA) conducted a series of joint surveys at various locations in Southern 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. This joint survey follows the template of similar recent exchanges with Natural Resources Canada and French Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire .

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.035

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 head0.440
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.000 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207