MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307630148 · doi:10.5539/mas.v16n4p40

Determination of Naturally Occurring Radionuclides Concentration in Environmental Samples in West Kirby Area Using Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy

2022· article· en· W4307630148 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ekundayo Oki Akinduro

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadionuclideRadiochemistryContaminationRadiumIsotopeSoil testThoriumSemiconductor detectorUraniumPhysicsEnvironmental scienceChemistrySoil waterDetectorNuclear physicsBiologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this work is to investigate and evaluate the level of contamination of naturally occurring radionuclides in environmental soil samples collected at a place from West Kirby using gamma-ray spectroscopy. The Broad Energy Germanium (BEGe2825) detector has the ability to detect gamma-rays in the range of 3 keV-3MeV. This detector offers a very good resolution, low noise performance and almost ideal Gaussian shape in our analysis. Under our depth of interest of 0 – 48 cm, a total of six spectra were measured. From known values of gamma-ray energies, a calibrated curve was plotted. From the analysis, the mean activity concentration of naturally radionuclides of uranium-238, thorium-232 and potassium-40 obtained are 6.7 ± 0.1 Bq/kg, 5.6 ± 0.1Bq/kg and 398.2± 8.2 Bq/kg were found in the range of (5.37 ± 0.30- 8.86 ±0.40) Bq/kg, (4.37 ± 0.31- 8.72 ±0.35) Bq/kg and (384 ± 19 and 416 ± 21) Bq/kg respectively. Man-made radionuclides of americium-241 and cesium-137 mean activity concentrations are 4.3± 0.1 Bq/kg and 14.5 ± 0.3 Bq/kg were found in the range of (BDL: 5.95±0.32) Bq/kg and (6.66 ± 0.35- 29.2 ±1.5) Bq/kg respectively.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207