MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415953084 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/202533807003

Determination of Absolute Activities and Neutron Fluence Rates Using a Coincidence Method

2025· article· en· W4415953084 on OpenAlexaff
Shokhrukh Mirzo Bakhodirov, Anja Seifert, D. D. Döhler, Pia Kahle, T. Kormoll

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsFluenceCoincidenceNeutron fluxNeutronMonte Carlo methodDetectorRadiationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Activation studies are an important tool for nuclear decommissioning. By activating material samples in controlled conditions in a known neutron fluence rate, the expected activity in decommissioning can be estimated. This work focuses on determining the fluence rate of a moderated (α, n) neutron source, a key parameter for performing quantitative activity experiments. The fluence rate is determined by an absolute measurement of the accumulated activity of neutron-activated reference samples with a well-known composition using a βγ-coincidence setup. This method requires both single β- and γ- detection, as well as coincidence data. A main advantage of this technique is that the resulting measurement is mostly independent of individual detector efficiencies. The current setup uses a combination of two detectors, consisting of one γ- and one β-detector, paired with a multi-channel data acquisition system, simultaneously recording hits in the β- and γ-channels including their timestamps. Coincidences are extracted in the offline analysis from the stored data. Having singles and coincident data in one dataset reduces the impact of certain corrections, e.g. dead time. Additionally, Monte Carlo techniques were implemented to assess γ-interactions in the γ-detector and to account for the fraction of fake coincidences. Samples, including aluminum ( 27 Al), gold ( 197 Au), Vanadium ( 51 V), sodium chloride (NaCl), and manganese ( 55 Mn) were activated. Calculated thermal fluence rates from weakly attenuating samples agree within uncertainties, with an average fluence rate of Ψ 0 = (2.58 ± 0.09) × 10 5 cm -2 s -1 .

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207