Consolidated Canadian Results to the
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the framework of combating the illicit trafficking of nuclear materials and other radioactive substances, the ITWG organised an international inter-laboratory round robin dealing with a thwarted illicit trafficking incident of a high-grade sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU). DRDC Ottawa coordinated Canada's response to the exercise, which included the participation of seven organisations, including this lab. The exercise involved a thorough forensic examination and analysis by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, nuclear characterisation of the material by six laboratories, and interpretation of the nuclear data for attribution of the materials origin by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Overall, the analysis was successful in identifying the material and providing a reasonable interpretation of the data. This report outlines Canada's response, the lessons learned, and the way ahead in terms of combating illicit trafficking and nuclear smuggling in Canada. A comparison of Canada's results to those of the other participating countries is also presented. Resume
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 | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.008 |
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".