MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254877443 · doi:10.1088/0026-1394/53/1a/06008

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K3 of the air-kerma standards of the NRC, Canada and the BIPM in medium-energy x-rays

2016· article· en· W4254877443 on OpenAlexaffabout
D T Burns, C Kessler, Ernesto Mainegra‐Hing, H Shen, M McEwen

Bibliographic record

VenueMetrologia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadioactive Decay and Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCanadian Standards Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutual recognitionKermaStandard uncertaintyMathematicsNuclear engineeringStatisticsMeasurement uncertaintyNuclear medicineEngineeringDosimetry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key comparison has been made between the air-kerma standards of the NRC, Canada and the BIPM in the medium-energy x-ray range. The results show the standards to be in agreement at the level of the standard uncertainty of the comparison of 3.3 parts in 10 3 . The results are analysed and presented in terms of degrees of equivalence, suitable for entry in the BIPM key comparison database. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report . Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/ . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCRI, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1000.051

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetrologiaSame topicRadioactive Decay and Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207