MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210644099 · doi:10.2172/1841690

Results for the Third Quarter Calendar Year 2021 Tank 50 Salt Solution Sample

2022· report· en· W4210644099 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles Crawford

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSavannah River National LaboratoryOffice of Environmental ManagementBattelleU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEnvironmental remediationWaste managementQuarter (Canadian coin)Sample (material)Environmental scienceSavannah River SiteShut downSalt (chemistry)Environmental engineeringContaminationChemistryRadioactive wasteEngineeringChromatographyProcess engineeringGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Technical Report, the chemical and radionuclide contaminant results from the Third Quarter Calendar Year 2021 (CY21) sample of Tank 50 salt solution are presented in tabulated form. The information from this characterization will be used by Savannah River Remediation (SRR) for the transfer of aqueous waste from Tank 50 to the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF), where the waste will be treated and disposed in the Saltstone Disposal Facility. This Technical Report compares results, where applicable, to SPF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Limits and Targets that were established at the time the Tank 50 sample was obtained. The chemical and radionuclide contaminant results from the characterization of the Third Quarter CY21 sampling of Tank 50 were requested by SRR personnel via a Task Technical Request (TTR) and details of the testing are presented in the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP). This Technical Report is part of Deliverable 2 relating to Task 1 from the SRR request. Data pertaining to the regulatory limits for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals per Task 2 from the SRR request, will be obtained semi-annually for the 1QCY21 and 3QCY21 Tank 50 samples.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207