Reflection on the proposed changes to dose quantities—an industrial perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2021, the ICRP initiated the revision of the general recommendations of the system of radiation protection, and part of it will focus on dose quantities. The recently published ICRP Publication 147 and ICRU Report 95 have described the extent of the proposed modifications and paved the way for the strategy to be adopted. These revisions would seek to simplify, improve the accuracy and extend the field of use of dose quantities. While the Radiological Protection Working Group of the World Nuclear Association recognises the notable improvement in the estimation of the protection quantities and the usefulness of such changes for the medical and research sector, the benefits of the proposed new system seem very limited for the nuclear industry and industries involving naturally occurring radioactive materials. The complexity associated with changing a long-standing and robust system and the risk incurred by the human factor seem unjustified, bearing in mind the likely cost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.054 | 0.074 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.022 | 0.030 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".