Comparative Analysis of Methods for Calculating the Energy Flux Density used in Assessing the Permissible Level of Environmental Pollution by Electromagnetic Radiation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the results of measurements and calculations of the power flux density in the frequency range 670 MHz-766 MHz (46th and 57th television channels) of digital broadcasting of the DVBT2 standard were presented. Experimental data on the power flux density were obtained by the selective electromagnetic field meters NARDA SRM-3000 with an isotropic antenna. The radiating system consists of 16 panel antennas (four-storey panel antennas) with a circular radiation pattern in the horizontal plane. Calculations were carried out in the ПК АЭМО (Software package for electromagnetic environment analysis) and MMANA programs. The data obtained were compared with the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of energy flux density (EFD) set by health and safety rules and standards (2.1.8/2.2.4.1383-03), which operate on the territory of Russia.The values obtained are significantly less than the acceptable levels. In the USA, Japan, European countries, Canada, China, and the PEL of energy flux density in the frequency range 300 MHz – 300 GHz are higher than in Russia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it