MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224311079 · doi:10.2478/amns.2021.2.00159

Radioactive source search problem and optimisation model based on meta-heuristic algorithm

2022· article· en· W4224311079 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Defense Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHeuristicProcess (computing)Search algorithmRadioactive sourceAlgorithmSearch theoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the process of rational development and utilisation of nuclear energy, people often face nuclear accidents such as lost and stolen radioactive sources; so, the means of searching for these sources quickly in highly radioactive environments is an important security challenge. In the past, these jobs were limited to workers specialising in nuclear technology. They used gamma-ray detection equipment to search for radioactive sources, but the search efficiency was low. The main purpose of this article is to design a meta-heuristic algorithm based on imitating professional technicians to locate radioactive sources in a computer-aided manner. At the same time, due to the complexity that may characterise the actual search, the search strategy must be optimised. The article established an intelligent random search model with human thinking. Finally, it was proved based on the mathematical theory that the complexity of the model search algorithm is linear, and the simulation experiment results show that the optimisation algorithm has good efficiency and fault tolerance.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.207 · 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