MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285170767 · doi:10.1109/tns.2022.3186831

A Machine Learning Approach to a Multidetector Array Response Function for Nuclear Search

2022· article· en· W4285170767 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Fobar, William Joe Vanderlip, William Koch, Peter H. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDefense Threat Reduction Agency
KeywordsDetectorComputer scienceFunction (biology)Artificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkAlgorithmPhysicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During nuclear search operations, the localization of radioactive sources can be a time-consuming process that requires mapping relative radiation intensity in a large area to determine the position of a source. This article introduces the use of machine learning, specifically a temporal convolutional network (TCN), to estimate the direction between a detector array and a static <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">137</sup> Cs source. This application of machine learning provides a directional vector in <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$4\pi $ </tex-math></inline-formula> with a 90% confidence of 5.6° and a 99% confidence within 11.2°. With the use of low-cost NaI(Tl) detectors, the effects of self-shielding within the array creates gamma-ray shadows depending on the orientation to the source. Using the convolved detector array response function, we apply supervised machine learning with a neural network to predict a unit vector that points toward the observed source. The directional vector is expected to reduce search times once implemented in future work.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Nuclear ScienceSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207