MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319983895 · doi:10.3390/s23041945

Ambient Dose and Dose Rate Measurement in SNOLAB Underground Laboratory at Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

2023· article· en· W4319983895 on OpenAlexafffundabout
V. V. Golovko, O. Kamaev, Jiansheng Sun, C. Jillings, P. Gorel, E. Vázquez-Jáuregui

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSnolabCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Advanced Education, Government of Alberta
KeywordsDosimeterEnvironmental scienceEquivalent doseElectromagnetic shieldingDetectorDose rateThermoluminescenceWater equivalentRadiation monitoringThermoluminescent dosimeterSensitivity (control systems)Remote sensingRadiationPhysicsEngineeringGeologyOpticsMedical physicsNuclear physicsElectrical engineeringMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper describes a system and experimental procedure that use integrating passive detectors, such as thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), for the measurement of ultra-low-level ambient dose equivalent rate values at the underground SNOLAB facility located in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. Because these detectors are passive and can be exposed for relatively long periods of time, they can provide better sensitivity for measuring ultra-low activity levels. The final characterization of ultra-low-level ambient dose around water shielding for ongoing direct dark matter search experiments in Cube Hall at SNOLAB underground laboratory is given. The conclusion is that TLDs provide reliable results in the measurement of the ultra-low-level environmental radiation background.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207