Atmospheric neutrons and BNCT: quantify the limit
An exploratory 2011 model: rare captures, local energy and a mean dose too low for macroscopic therapy.
Every piece of research starts with the same question: what do we already know? Depending on the answer, compute, complete a model or learn from data; then make the tool usable and demonstrate that it works. Follow the thread down: each step leads to its stories, each on its own page.
Step 1 of 5 · Is the link between causes and effects known?
Yes: compute it, with an explicit model.
When the link is known, compute it with an explicit model, calibrated and validated on data; learning is added only for a demonstrated benefit.
An exploratory 2011 model: rare captures, local energy and a mean dose too low for macroscopic therapy.

One fraction of 15 Gy to the rectum: 72.7 Gy under LQ, 59.4 Gy under LQL.

One year at 10-minute resolution in about 150 ms, with its limits stated.

sCV and F describe a site before any model is fitted.
Step 2 of 5 · Is the model enough?
Not quite: keep it and learn only what is missing.
When the model falls short, complete it: keep the model, learn only what is missing.

Marie Fusella Giuntini and Dominique Barbolosi: three equations, 50 patients, a hybrid twin in progress.

Symmetry-constrained forecasting: the structure of the signal written into the reference.
Step 3 of 5 · Are the useful relations known?
Not well enough: learn from data, with only the complexity that pays.
When the useful relations are not known well enough, evaluate what the data can teach, with only as much complexity as pays.

One frugal learner forecasts the whole Corsican electricity mix.

A per-cell ELM beats the same ELM reading the whole field, with a thousand times fewer parameters.

How much model a forecast really needs before it is deployed.

Compress the input only when the compression serves the forecast.
Step 4 of 5 · How can people use these tools?
Language models help; the calculation stays with validated codes.
Language models help people use validated tools; the calculation, the checking and the responsibility stay with validated codes and people.

Execute, clarify or refuse: never guess.
Step 5 of 5 · How do we know it works?
Compare with a reference and publish code, data and limits.
Judge against a reference, publish code, data and limits, make research findable and reusable.

With J. P. A. Ioannidis (Stanford), J. Baas and R. Boverhof (Elsevier): influence on a doubling scale, impact next to integrity, excellence as a system.

Research is excluded under conditions, transfers are not: timeline, who is responsible, and ten tools for a lab.

NICE compares a model's errors with those of persistence.

A tolerance-based test carried over from radiotherapy.
A saturated ecosystem, and a practical toolkit for discoverable research.

The RTVACOS framework: rigour, transparency, visibility, adoption.