MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083690867 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2019-0431

PUC Program: the pulse pile up correction for X-ray and gamma ray spectrometry

2020· article· en· W3083690867 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S.M. Karabıdak, Selim Kaya

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPileDetectorElectronic circuitSpectral lineGamma ray spectrometryPulse (music)Gamma rayX-ray detectorX-rayComputational physicsOpticsAlgorithmAstrophysicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pile up and dead time are two important corrections in the analysis of X-ray and gamma ray spectra. The most important of these is pile up correction because these peaks do not really exist in the spectra; they only seem to exist. For this reason, these peaks affect both the qualitative and quantitative accuracy of the analysis. In addition, the pile up pulses forming the pile up peaks increase the background count in the spectrum. Companies that produce X-ray or gamma ray detector systems design pile up reject circuits and integrate them into detector systems to prevent these pulses. These circuits have time limitations because they are made up of electronic devices. For this reason, the pile up problem cannot be solved completely in these circuits. Therefore, mathematical models based on a statistical approach are needed. Such a model was developed in this study. A computer program based on this model was developed. This developed program has been applied to X-ray and gamma ray spectra. It has been shown that this model provides about 2% correction in the main peak regions and significantly reduces background counts.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207