MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205630107 · doi:10.1007/s00411-021-00956-0

Assessment of thoron contribution to indoor radon exposure in Canada

2022· article· en· W4205630107 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation and Environmental Biophysics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadonRadon exposureEnvironmental scienceNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract From 2007 to 2013, simultaneous radon ( 222 Rn) and thoron ( 220 Rn) measurements were conducted in a total of 3534 residential homes in 34 metropolitan areas covering 71% of the Canadian population. While radon levels were above the detector’s detection limit in almost all homes, thoron concentrations were measurable in only 1738 homes. When analysis was limited to homes where thoron concentrations exceeded the detection limit, a pooled analysis confirmed that thoron is log-normally distributed in the indoor environment, and the distribution was characterized by a population-weighted geometric mean of 13 Bq/m 3 and a geometric standard deviation of 1.89. Thoron contribution to indoor radon dose varied widely, ranging from 1.3 to 32% geographically. This study indicated that on average, thoron contributes 4% of the radiation dose due to total indoor radon exposure ( 222 Rn and 220 Rn) in Canada.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.280 · 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