Idaho National Laboratory Site Environmental Surveillance Program Report: Third Quarter 2023
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis Results AirParticulate Filters Gross alpha, gross betaThere were no statistically significant differences among groups for the months of July and September for gross alpha and gross beta concentrations.Statistically significant differences were observed for gross alpha and gross beta concentrations for the quarter and the month of August.No result exceeded the Derived Concentration Standard (DCS) or 99%/95% upper tolerance limit (UTL) for gross alpha or gross beta activity in air.Quarterly Composite Gamma-emitting v Table ES-1.Continued.Media Sample Type Analysis Results Potatoes Vegetation Gamma-emitting radionuclides, strontium-90 No human-made gamma-emitting radionuclides nor 90 Sr were found in any of the ten samples (including a duplicate and a control) collected this year.Lettuce Vegetation Gamma-emitting radionuclides, strontium-90 No human-made gamma-emitting radionuclides or 90 Sr were found in any of the nine samples collected.Alfalfa Vegetation Gamma-emitting radionuclides, strontium-90 Samples were collected from five locations (including a duplicate).No human-made gamma-emitting radionuclides or 90 Sr were found.Grain Vegetation Gamma-emitting radionuclides, strontium-90 No human-made gamma-emitting radionuclides or 90 Sr were found in any of the 13 grain samples collected (including the duplicate and control).Large game animals Tissue Gamma-emitting radionuclides No human-made gamma-emitting radionuclides were found in any of the tissue samples collected in third quarter.vi
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".