Radioactive waste management complex low-level waste radiological composite analysis

The composite analysis estimates the projected cumulative impacts to future members of the public from the disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) and all other sources of radioactive contamination at the INEEL that could interact with the LLW disposal facility to affect the radiological dose. Based upon the composite analysis evaluation, waste buried in the Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) at the RWMC is the only source at the INEEL that will significantly interact with the LLW facility. The source term used in the composite analysis consists of all historical SDA subsurface disposals of radionuclides as well as the authorized LLW subsurface disposal inventory and projected LLW subsurface disposal inventory. Exposure scenarios evaluated in the composite analysis include all the all-pathways and groundwater protection scenarios. The projected dose of 58 mrem/yr exceeds the composite analysis guidance dose constraint of 30 mrem/yr; therefore, an options analysis was conducted to determine the feasibility of reducing the projected annual dose. Three options for creating such a reduction were considered: (1) lowering infiltration of precipitation through the waste by providing a better cover, (2) maintaining control over the RWMC and portions of the INEEL indefinitely, and (3) extending the period of institutional control beyond the 100 years assumed in the composite analysis. Of the three options investigated, maintaining control over the RWMC and a small part of the present INEEL appears to be feasible and cost effective

Generalized quantum Fokker-Planck, diffusion and Smoluchowski equations with true probability distribution functions

Traditionally, the quantum Brownian motion is described by Fokker-Planck or diffusion equations in terms of quasi-probability distribution functions, e.g., Wigner functions. These often become singular or negative in the full quantum regime. In this paper a simple approach to non-Markovian theory of quantum Brownian motion using {\it true probability distribution functions} is presented. Based on an initial coherent state representation of the bath oscillators and an equilibrium canonical distribution of the quantum mechanical mean values of their co-ordinates and momenta we derive a generalized quantum Langevin equation in $c$-numbers and show that the latter is amenable to a theoretical analysis in terms of the classical theory of non-Markovian dynamics. The corresponding Fokker-Planck, diffusion and the Smoluchowski equations are the {\it exact} quantum analogues of their classical counterparts. The present work is {\it independent} of path integral techniques. The theory as developed here is a natural extension of its classical version and is valid for arbitrary temperature and friction (Smoluchowski equation being considered in the overdamped limit).Comment: RevTex, 16 pages, 7 figures, To appear in Physical Review E (minor revision

Cumulative distribution functions: An alternative approach to examine the triggering of prepared motor actions in the StartReact effect

There has been much debate concerning whether startling sensory stimuli can activate a fast-neural pathway for movement triggering (StartReact) which is different from that of voluntary movements. Activity in sternocleidomastoid (SCM) electromyogram is suggested to indicate activation of this pathway. We evaluated whether SCM activity can accurately identify trials which may differ in their neurophysiological triggering and assessed the use of cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of reaction time (RT) data to identify trials with the shortest RTs for analysis. Using recent data sets from the StartReact literature, we examined the relationship between RT and SCM activity. We categorised data into short/longer RT bins using CDFs and used linear mixed-effects models to compare potential conclusions that can be drawn when categorising data on the basis of RT versus on the basis of SCM activity. The capacity of SCM to predict RT is task-specific, making it an unreliable indicator of distinct neurophysiological mechanisms. Classification of trials using CDFs is capable of capturing potential task- or muscle-related differences in triggering whilst avoiding the pitfalls of the traditional SCM activity-based classification method. We conclude that SCM activity is not always evident on trials that show the early triggering of movements seen in the StartReact phenomenon. We further propose that a more comprehensive analysis of data may be achieved through the inclusion of CDF analyses. These findings have implications for future research investigating movement triggering as well as for potential therapeutic applications of StartReact

Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda

Science is among humanity’s greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions. Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.Open access articleThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]