MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study on autonomous search for multiple radioactive leakage sources based on updated infotaxis in nuclear emergency rescue

2025· article· en· W7087307923 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Engineering and Design · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHefei Institutes of Physical Science, Chinese Academy of SciencesChina National Nuclear CorporationHefei Normal UniversityCanadian Anesthesiologists' Society
KeywordsLeakage (economics)Emergency responseRadioactive wasteEmergency rescueNuclear powerEmergency management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear facilities face leakage risks from natural hazards, human errors, or external attacks, often generating multi-point radioactive leakage sources that produce large-scale dynamic radiation plumes through atmospheric dispersion and multi-source superposition. Unlike orphan source recovery operations (e.g., retrieving displaced or poorly shielded sealed radioactive sources in localized fields), nuclear emergencies require urgent identification of leakage points to enable real-time leakage sources suppression. Based on the Daya Bay nuclear power plant scenario, this study proposes a multi-source radiation leakage inversion model based on an updated infotaxis algorithm, which incorporates the information entropy of superimposed radiation fields from multiple sources. The search path of the mobile detector is optimized by integrating a movement strategy activation function to adjust subsequent positions. Simulation results demonstrate that the hexagonal path unit enhances search efficiency by 21.78% compared to traditional quadrilateral path units. In a scenario involving three radioactive leakage sources, the mobile detector successfully identifies all sources locations through exhaustive grid sampling, achieving an average positioning error of 5.73 m. This approach provides a novel perspective for identifying multiple radioactive leakage sources in nuclear accidents.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear Engineering and DesignSame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207