MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182207333 · doi:10.1051/radiopro/2021018

Impacts of the Covid-19 on the IRPA young generation activities in radiation protection: testimonies and experience feedback

2021· article· en· W3182207333 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Andresz, F. Kabrt, Marina Sáez-Muñoz, O. Nusrat, C. Papp

Bibliographic record

VenueRadioprotection · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNuclear Issues and Defense
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Work (physics)Radiation protection2019-20 coronavirus outbreakConsistency (knowledge bases)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Radiation oncologyFirst generationTelecommunicationsOutbreakComputer scienceMedicinePhysicsEnvironmental healthRadiation therapyNuclear medicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The measures implemented to limit the spread of Covid-19 have brought many challenges on the work organization, the radiation protection being no exception. The IRPA Young Generation Network has investigated through a collection of testimonies the impacts of these measures and how the continuity and consistency of radiation protection was ensured. This article presents the results of the analysis of the testimonies. The impacts of the Covid-19 for each of the radiation protection related sectors covered by the survey are presented from a young generation perspective. The impacts are never negligible and even more important in some sectors and for some type of work. The adaptations made to the radiation protection and how they were implemented are shown, as well as the lessons-learned from these unprecedented circumstances.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadioprotectionSame topicNuclear Issues and DefenseFrench-language works237,207