MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393151476 · doi:10.1097/hp.0000000000001785

High-rate Gamma Spectrometry Using a LaBr3(Ce) Scintillator with a Fast Pulse Shaping

2024· article· en· W4393151476 on OpenAlexaff
Tianyi Ren, Soo Hyun Byun

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreamplifierScintillatorSpectrometerPhotomultiplierDetectorDead timeMaterials scienceOpticsPulse (music)PhysicsOptoelectronicsAmplifierCMOS

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The performance of a LaBr3(Ce) gamma spectrometer at high count rates was investigated up to an input count rate of 1.3 Mcps. In order to make its pulse processing faster, a preamplifier provided by the detector manufacturer was eliminated, and the signal from the photomultiplier tube was fed directly to a digital pulse processing system. To accomplish both fast pulse processing and good energy resolution, the pulse-shaping parameters were optimized at a low count rate of 1.5 kcps, and then measurements were carried out at various count rates. Input count rates ranging from 1.5 kcps to 21 kcps were produced using a set of 137Cs resin sources, while higher rates between 45 kcps and 1.3 Mcps were produced using a 1.2-GBq 137Cs source. The spectrometer showed an excellent performance for the input rate up to 150 kcps, while the dead time increased rapidly for the input rates above 150 kcps. The system dead time has been improved greatly by eliminating the preamplifier.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PhysicsSame topicRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207