MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7028940892

High sensitivity lithium fluoride as a detector for environmental dosimetry

2003· dissertation· en· W7028940892 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2003
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology, Conservation, and Geographical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorLithium fluorideSensitivity (control systems)DosimetryLithium (medication)Instrumentation (computer programming)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new thermoluminescence dosimetry system for environmental applications was tested, which used high sensitivity lithium fluoride (TLD-100H). The energy response of the bare thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) was measured for photon beams with mean energies from 24 keV to 1.1 MeV, and the results were compared with standard lithium fluoride (TLD-100). The energy response was also measured for TLD-100H card-mounted dosimeters encapsulated in Teflon RTM, used as part of the Harshaw Type 8855 environmental dosimeter. The EGSnrc Monte Carlo system was used to calculate the dose to the TLDs in both the bare chip holder and the 8855 dosimeter, in order to calculate the thermoluminescence per unit of absorbed dose to the TLDs. The results were broadly consistent with existing data, with the response of both TLD materials correlating with the ionization density of the photon beams.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicEcology, Conservation, and Geographical Studies→French-language works237,207→