Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Further comments on "Individual external dose monitoring of all citizens of Date City by passive dosimeter 5 to 51 months after the Fukushima NPP accident (series): 1." : Inconsistencies in Table 1 2014 Q3 and Figure 4f

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2003.05403 v1 pith:GSDZ7EZO submitted 2020-03-10 physics.med-ph

classification physics.med-ph
keywords tableperiodseriesairbornecitizenscitydatadate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We point out serious inconsistencies of the first paper of the series, written by Makoto Miyazaki and Ryugo Hayano, which discusses the correlation between the personal doses of the citizens of Date City measured by glass badges with the ambient dose rates measured by six airborne surveys. The last of the six airborne survey was made in the period of 2014 Q3 (from October 2014 to December 2014). The real number of participants of the period is about 14,500; however, in Table 1 2014 Q3 it is written that the number of participants is 21,080 and in Fig. 4f 21,052. We conclude that the analysis of the paper with respect to Table 1 2014 Q3 and Fig. 4f are done without using real correct data and we cannot obtain any meaningful information from the table and figure. Since the period 2014 Q3 is also included in Fig. 5 of the second paper of the series, it is quite possible that Fig. 5 of the second paper is made on the basis of, at least partially, false data and is not reliable.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools