MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318955083 · doi:10.1088/1361-6498/acb82a

Indoor radon survey in Whitehorse, Canada, and dose assessment

2023· article· en· W4318955083 on OpenAlexaffabout
Violeta Hansen, Angela R. Sabo, Juergen Korn, Douglas MacLean, Frank F. Rigét, Daniel Spelling Clausen, Joel F. Cubley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Radiological Protection · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRadioactivity and Radon Measurements
Canadian institutionsYukon Department of EnvironmentYukon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadonEnvironmental healthRisk assessmentEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningMedicineComputer scienceComputer securityPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Radon-222 ( 222 Rn) and its decay products are the primary sources of a population’s exposure to background ionizing radiation. Radon decay products are the leading cause of lung cancer for non-smokers and the second leading cause of lung cancer after smoking for smokers. A community-driven long-term radon survey was completed in 232 residential homes in different subdivisions of Whitehorse, the capital of the Yukon, during the heating season from November to April in 2016–2017 and in 2017–2018. Radon concentrations were measured in living rooms and bedrooms on ground floors. The arithmetic and geometric means of indoor radon activity concentrations in different subdivisions of Whitehorse ranged from 52 ± 0.6 Bq m −3 and 37 ± 2.3 Bq m −3 in the Downtown area of Whitehorse to 993.0 ± 55.0 Bq m −3 and 726.2 ± 2.4 Bq m −3 in Wolf Creek. Underlying geology and glacial surfaces may partly explain these variations of indoor radon concentrations in subdivisions of Whitehorse. A total of 78 homes (34.0%) had radon concentrations higher than 100 Bq m −3 , 47 homes (20.5%) had concentrations higher than 200 Bq m −3 and 33 homes (14.4%) had concentrations higher than 300 Bq m −3 . The indoor radon contribution to the annual effective inhalation dose to residents ranged from 3.0 mSv in the Downtown area to 51.0 mSv in Wolf Creek. The estimated annual average dose to adults in Whitehorse, Yukon, is higher than the world’s average annual effective dose of 1.3 mSv due to the inhalation of indoor radon. The annual radon inhalation effective dose was assessed using radon measurements taken during winter; hence the assessed dose may be overestimated. Cost-efficient mitigation methods are available to reduce radon in existing buildings and to prevent radon entry into new buildings.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.414
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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Radiological ProtectionSame topicRadioactivity and Radon MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207