Monitoring fish, wildlife, radionuclides and chemicals at Hanford, Washington
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concern about the effects of potential releases from nuclear and non-nuclear activities on the US Department of Energy's Hanford Site in southeastern Washington has evolved over four decades into a comprehensive environmental monitoring and surveillance program. The program includes field sampling, and chemical and physical analyses of air, surface and ground water, fish, wildlife, soil, foodstuffs, and natural vegetation. In addition to monitoring radioactivity in fish and wildlife, population numbers of key species are determined, usually during the breeding season. Data from monitoring efforts are used to assess the environmental impacts of Hanford operations and calculate the overall radiological dose to humans onsite, at the Site perimeter, or residing in nearby communities. Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) spawning in the Columbia River at Hanford has increased in recent years with a concomitant increase in winter nesting activity of bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). An elk (Cervus elaphus) herd, established by immigration in 1972, is also increasing. Nesting Canada goose (Branta canadensis) and great blue heron (Ardea herodias), and various other animals, e.g., mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and coyotes (Canis latrans) are common. Measured exposure to penetrating radiation and calculated radiation doses to the public are well below applicable regulatory limits. 35 refs., 4 figs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".