The Experts below are selected from a list of 5844 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Laurence Alison - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • forensic psychologists casebook psychological profiling and criminal investigation
    2013
    Co-Authors: Laurence Alison
    Abstract:

    Part 1: The Context of Criminal Investigation 1. From trait-based profiling to psychological contributions to apprehension methods by Laurence Alison 2. Jack the Ripper and the Whitechapel murders: a very Victorian critical incident by Jonathan Ogan and Laurence Alison 3. Psychological research and police investigations: does the research meet the needs? by Emma C. Barrett 4. Suspect prioritization in the investigation of sex offences: from clinical classification and profiling to pragmatism by Georgia Wilson and Laurence Alison 5. The range of issues in crime analysis by Nina Cope 6. The interpersonal dynamics of police interviewing by Laurence Alison and Joanne Howard 7. Policing the police: theoretical and practical contributions of psychologists to understanding and preventing corruption by Louise E. Porter 8. Working with the courts: advice for expert witnesses by David Ormerod and Jim Sturman QC Part 2: Advising on Investigations 9. Rhetorical shaping in an undercover operation: the investigation of Colin Stagg in the Rachel Nickell murder enquiry by Laurence Alison and David Canter 10. Guidelines for profilers by Laurence Alison, Alasdair Goodwill and Emily Alison 11. Assessing the reliability of interviews with vulnerable witnesses by Katarina Fritzon 12. Malingering or memory loss in a major collision investigation: reconstructing accounts of suspects, victims and witnesses by Laurence Alison 13. Suicide or murder? Implicit narratives in the Eddie Gilfoyle case by David Canter 14. A stalking management programme: preparing Advisory Material for non-psychologists by Emily Alison and Laurence Alison 15. Consent, inference and patterns of abuse in a case of domestic violence by Emily Alison and Laurence Alison 16. Conclusions: personal reflections on the last decade by Adrian West and Laurence Alison

  • the forensic psychologist s casebook psychological profiling and criminal investigation
    2005
    Co-Authors: Laurence Alison
    Abstract:

    Part 1: The Context of Criminal Investigation 1. From trait-based profiling to psychological contributions to apprehension methods by Laurence Alison 2. Jack the Ripper and the Whitechapel murders: a very Victorian critical incident by Jonathan Ogan and Laurence Alison 3. Psychological research and police investigations: does the research meet the needs? by Emma C. Barrett 4. Suspect prioritization in the investigation of sex offences: from clinical classification and profiling to pragmatism by Georgia Wilson and Laurence Alison 5. The range of issues in crime analysis by Nina Cope 6. The interpersonal dynamics of police interviewing by Laurence Alison and Joanne Howard 7. Policing the police: theoretical and practical contributions of psychologists to understanding and preventing corruption by Louise E. Porter 8. Working with the courts: advice for expert witnesses by David Ormerod and Jim Sturman QC Part 2: Advising on Investigations 9. Rhetorical shaping in an undercover operation: the investigation of Colin Stagg in the Rachel Nickell murder enquiry by Laurence Alison and David Canter 10. Guidelines for profilers by Laurence Alison, Alasdair Goodwill and Emily Alison 11. Assessing the reliability of interviews with vulnerable witnesses by Katarina Fritzon 12. Malingering or memory loss in a major collision investigation: reconstructing accounts of suspects, victims and witnesses by Laurence Alison 13. Suicide or murder? Implicit narratives in the Eddie Gilfoyle case by David Canter 14. A stalking management programme: preparing Advisory Material for non-psychologists by Emily Alison and Laurence Alison 15. Consent, inference and patterns of abuse in a case of domestic violence by Emily Alison and Laurence Alison 16. Conclusions: personal reflections on the last decade by Adrian West and Laurence Alison

Louis Baptiste - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: an overview of the new calculation method
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Bez Jeremy, Thomas Samuel, Louis Baptiste
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been developed to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand ac-cidents. Current values were determined in 1996 according to specific scenarios for five expo-sure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiological data. In September 2013, an international working group was created to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. Within this framework, it has been decided to change the current deterministic and empiric method to a more accurate one based on Monte-Carlo calculations. This evolution allows the working group to be more flexible and to get more accurate results, for instance by taking into account all particles created.Monte-Carlo calculations let assess fluences of each type of particle (at one meter in the case of the Q System). Fluence-to-dose conversions are done separately from the Monte-Carlo cal-culations by using dose conversion factors (DCF) from the ICRP 116 by log-log interpolations during post processing.The main asset of this process is that it allows to easily assess the equivalent dose to different organs (skin, lens of the eye…) and the effective dose to the whole body, by using the correct DCF, without running any new Monte-Carlo calculations. It also allows the working group to present result for different irradiation geometries (ISO, AP…) at the same time and to easily update the A1 and A2 values, for any radionuclide, should the ICRP provide new spectra data and/or DCF.To perform an exhaustive and accurate dose assessment, some DCF, not available in the ICRP publications or in the literature, were required, such as local skin dose due to neutrons and photons. Therefore, new DCF have been evaluated (publication in progress).The new Q System would, once validated by the TRANSCC, be able to provide A1 and A2 values based on exposure from all radiations to all sensible organs and to the whole body and for at least two irradiation field

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: development, progress and outcomes
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Louis Baptiste, Bez Jeremy, Thomas Samuel, Moutarde Marianne, Gauthier Florence, Cabianca Tiberio, Brown Iain, Foster Matthew, Endres Janis, Eberhardt Holger
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been de-veloped to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand accidents, with the objective to limit the accidental exposure of persons below an effective dose of 50 mSv and a skin equivalent dose of 500 mSv. Current values were determined in 1996 according to spe-cific scenarios for five exposure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiologi-cal data. In addition, progress in computer hardware and software allow the implementation of new methods of calculation, which are more complete and accurate. In September 2013, it was decided between NRA, PHE, GRS and IRSN to create an international working group to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. The first findings and results were presented during the PATRAM 2016 conference. The main items considered are the following:1.Using new data from the latest ICRP publications for emission spectra and external dose coef-ficients. 2.Using Monte-Carlo methods to take into account contributions from all radiations. 3.Selecting the irradiation field geometry.4.Selecting the calculation model for beta radiation and neutron emission from (α,n) reactions.5.Developing a specific irradiation scenario to the eye lens and the associated reference dose.6.Dealing with the progeny radionuclides. 7.Reviewing QC (inhalation) and QD (ingestion) values with the updated ICRP intake dose coeffi-cients that introduced new particle sizes and chemical forms.8.Reviewing QD (contamination) and QE (submersion) using Monte-Carlo methods.9.Considering the multi-path cumulative dose principle where simultaneous exposures may oc-cur. The review of items 1 to 4 has been completed; items 5 to 9 are in progress and discussion is pending on further work to be completed in the future.This paper will indicate the status of work that has been performed since 2016, explain the main changes in the calculation methods as well as the tools that have been developed to evaluate the Q values for any radionuclide, show results and describe the actions that are not yet completed. The WG expects the updated A values to be presented to the TRANSSC by 2021

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: impact of all radiations on QA and QB
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Thomas Samuel, Bez Jeremy, Louis Baptiste
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been developed to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand ac-cidents. Current values were determined in 1996 according to specific scenarios for five expo-sure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiological data. In September 2013, an international working group was created to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. Within this framework, it has been decided to change the current deterministic and empiric method to a more accurate one, based on Monte-Carlo calculations. This evolution allows the working group to be more flexible and to get more accurate results, for instance by taking into account all particles created. It is an important evolution as QA and QB, used to evaluate the effects of external exposure (in order to determine the A1 values), are only related to, respectively, effective dose due to pho-tons and skin equivalent dose due to electrons. The same issue exists for QD (contamination due to beta emissions only) and QE (exposure due to submersion in a noble gas). The evolution now allows to account for all radiations for all Q values.Of about a thousand radionuclides to be considered, the working group retained 6 well-known radionuclides (60Co, 154Eu, 134Cs, 192Ir, 85Kr, 18F) to firstly evaluate the consequences of this evolution on the QA and QB values. This list of 6 radionuclides was agreed because it con-tains different type of emitter (-) and covers a wide variety of use. Therefore, IRSN has analysed, for the working group, the contribution of each radiation (, Auger & internal conversion electrons, -) on the effective dose and on the skin equivalent dose to show the impact on the A1 values. The possible consequences on the transport of radioactive Materials will also be discussed.The new Q System would, once validated by the TRANSCC, be able to provide A1 and A2 values based on exposure from all radiations to all sensible organs and to the whole body and for at least two irradiation field

Sarah Higgins - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • the dcc curation lifecycle model
    ACM IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 2008
    Co-Authors: Sarah Higgins
    Abstract:

    The scientific record and the documentary heritage are increasingly created in digital form. The UK based Digital Curation Centre supports institutions who store, manage and preserve such data to help ensure its enhancement and continuing long-term use. The DCC (Digital Curation Centre) Curation Lifecycle Model provides a generic graphical high-level overview of the stages required for successful curation and preservation of digital Material from initial conceptualisation. The model can be used to plan curation and preservation activities, to ensure sustainability of repository content or other digital Material, within an organisation or consortium. It will help to ensure that all necessary stages are undertaken, each in the correct sequence. The model enables granular functionality to be mapped against it to define roles and responsibilities, and build a framework of standards and technologies to implement. It can help with the process of identifying additional steps which may be required, or actions which are not required by certain situations or disciplines, and of ensuring that processes and policies are adequately documented. Digital Curation Centre staff developed the model before undertaking a period of public consultation, which was recently completed. The newly ratified model will shortly be used by the DCC to ensure that information, services and Advisory Material cover all areas of the lifecycle. Domain-specific variations of the model will be developed, with greater levels of granularity, to help ensure that advice and information are easily accessible from the website. One planned utilisation is the development of domain specific standards frameworks within the DCC DIFFUSE Standards Frameworks, to help practitioners identify which standards they should be using and where they would be appropriately implemented. This poster will present the DCC Curation Lifecycle Model, incorporating the results of the public consultation period held during December 2007 to February 2008.

Bez Jeremy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: an overview of the new calculation method
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Bez Jeremy, Thomas Samuel, Louis Baptiste
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been developed to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand ac-cidents. Current values were determined in 1996 according to specific scenarios for five expo-sure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiological data. In September 2013, an international working group was created to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. Within this framework, it has been decided to change the current deterministic and empiric method to a more accurate one based on Monte-Carlo calculations. This evolution allows the working group to be more flexible and to get more accurate results, for instance by taking into account all particles created.Monte-Carlo calculations let assess fluences of each type of particle (at one meter in the case of the Q System). Fluence-to-dose conversions are done separately from the Monte-Carlo cal-culations by using dose conversion factors (DCF) from the ICRP 116 by log-log interpolations during post processing.The main asset of this process is that it allows to easily assess the equivalent dose to different organs (skin, lens of the eye…) and the effective dose to the whole body, by using the correct DCF, without running any new Monte-Carlo calculations. It also allows the working group to present result for different irradiation geometries (ISO, AP…) at the same time and to easily update the A1 and A2 values, for any radionuclide, should the ICRP provide new spectra data and/or DCF.To perform an exhaustive and accurate dose assessment, some DCF, not available in the ICRP publications or in the literature, were required, such as local skin dose due to neutrons and photons. Therefore, new DCF have been evaluated (publication in progress).The new Q System would, once validated by the TRANSCC, be able to provide A1 and A2 values based on exposure from all radiations to all sensible organs and to the whole body and for at least two irradiation field

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: development, progress and outcomes
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Louis Baptiste, Bez Jeremy, Thomas Samuel, Moutarde Marianne, Gauthier Florence, Cabianca Tiberio, Brown Iain, Foster Matthew, Endres Janis, Eberhardt Holger
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been de-veloped to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand accidents, with the objective to limit the accidental exposure of persons below an effective dose of 50 mSv and a skin equivalent dose of 500 mSv. Current values were determined in 1996 according to spe-cific scenarios for five exposure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiologi-cal data. In addition, progress in computer hardware and software allow the implementation of new methods of calculation, which are more complete and accurate. In September 2013, it was decided between NRA, PHE, GRS and IRSN to create an international working group to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. The first findings and results were presented during the PATRAM 2016 conference. The main items considered are the following:1.Using new data from the latest ICRP publications for emission spectra and external dose coef-ficients. 2.Using Monte-Carlo methods to take into account contributions from all radiations. 3.Selecting the irradiation field geometry.4.Selecting the calculation model for beta radiation and neutron emission from (α,n) reactions.5.Developing a specific irradiation scenario to the eye lens and the associated reference dose.6.Dealing with the progeny radionuclides. 7.Reviewing QC (inhalation) and QD (ingestion) values with the updated ICRP intake dose coeffi-cients that introduced new particle sizes and chemical forms.8.Reviewing QD (contamination) and QE (submersion) using Monte-Carlo methods.9.Considering the multi-path cumulative dose principle where simultaneous exposures may oc-cur. The review of items 1 to 4 has been completed; items 5 to 9 are in progress and discussion is pending on further work to be completed in the future.This paper will indicate the status of work that has been performed since 2016, explain the main changes in the calculation methods as well as the tools that have been developed to evaluate the Q values for any radionuclide, show results and describe the actions that are not yet completed. The WG expects the updated A values to be presented to the TRANSSC by 2021

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: impact of all radiations on QA and QB
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Thomas Samuel, Bez Jeremy, Louis Baptiste
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been developed to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand ac-cidents. Current values were determined in 1996 according to specific scenarios for five expo-sure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiological data. In September 2013, an international working group was created to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. Within this framework, it has been decided to change the current deterministic and empiric method to a more accurate one, based on Monte-Carlo calculations. This evolution allows the working group to be more flexible and to get more accurate results, for instance by taking into account all particles created. It is an important evolution as QA and QB, used to evaluate the effects of external exposure (in order to determine the A1 values), are only related to, respectively, effective dose due to pho-tons and skin equivalent dose due to electrons. The same issue exists for QD (contamination due to beta emissions only) and QE (exposure due to submersion in a noble gas). The evolution now allows to account for all radiations for all Q values.Of about a thousand radionuclides to be considered, the working group retained 6 well-known radionuclides (60Co, 154Eu, 134Cs, 192Ir, 85Kr, 18F) to firstly evaluate the consequences of this evolution on the QA and QB values. This list of 6 radionuclides was agreed because it con-tains different type of emitter (-) and covers a wide variety of use. Therefore, IRSN has analysed, for the working group, the contribution of each radiation (, Auger & internal conversion electrons, -) on the effective dose and on the skin equivalent dose to show the impact on the A1 values. The possible consequences on the transport of radioactive Materials will also be discussed.The new Q System would, once validated by the TRANSCC, be able to provide A1 and A2 values based on exposure from all radiations to all sensible organs and to the whole body and for at least two irradiation field

Thomas Samuel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: an overview of the new calculation method
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Bez Jeremy, Thomas Samuel, Louis Baptiste
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been developed to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand ac-cidents. Current values were determined in 1996 according to specific scenarios for five expo-sure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiological data. In September 2013, an international working group was created to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. Within this framework, it has been decided to change the current deterministic and empiric method to a more accurate one based on Monte-Carlo calculations. This evolution allows the working group to be more flexible and to get more accurate results, for instance by taking into account all particles created.Monte-Carlo calculations let assess fluences of each type of particle (at one meter in the case of the Q System). Fluence-to-dose conversions are done separately from the Monte-Carlo cal-culations by using dose conversion factors (DCF) from the ICRP 116 by log-log interpolations during post processing.The main asset of this process is that it allows to easily assess the equivalent dose to different organs (skin, lens of the eye…) and the effective dose to the whole body, by using the correct DCF, without running any new Monte-Carlo calculations. It also allows the working group to present result for different irradiation geometries (ISO, AP…) at the same time and to easily update the A1 and A2 values, for any radionuclide, should the ICRP provide new spectra data and/or DCF.To perform an exhaustive and accurate dose assessment, some DCF, not available in the ICRP publications or in the literature, were required, such as local skin dose due to neutrons and photons. Therefore, new DCF have been evaluated (publication in progress).The new Q System would, once validated by the TRANSCC, be able to provide A1 and A2 values based on exposure from all radiations to all sensible organs and to the whole body and for at least two irradiation field

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: development, progress and outcomes
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Louis Baptiste, Bez Jeremy, Thomas Samuel, Moutarde Marianne, Gauthier Florence, Cabianca Tiberio, Brown Iain, Foster Matthew, Endres Janis, Eberhardt Holger
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been de-veloped to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand accidents, with the objective to limit the accidental exposure of persons below an effective dose of 50 mSv and a skin equivalent dose of 500 mSv. Current values were determined in 1996 according to spe-cific scenarios for five exposure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiologi-cal data. In addition, progress in computer hardware and software allow the implementation of new methods of calculation, which are more complete and accurate. In September 2013, it was decided between NRA, PHE, GRS and IRSN to create an international working group to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. The first findings and results were presented during the PATRAM 2016 conference. The main items considered are the following:1.Using new data from the latest ICRP publications for emission spectra and external dose coef-ficients. 2.Using Monte-Carlo methods to take into account contributions from all radiations. 3.Selecting the irradiation field geometry.4.Selecting the calculation model for beta radiation and neutron emission from (α,n) reactions.5.Developing a specific irradiation scenario to the eye lens and the associated reference dose.6.Dealing with the progeny radionuclides. 7.Reviewing QC (inhalation) and QD (ingestion) values with the updated ICRP intake dose coeffi-cients that introduced new particle sizes and chemical forms.8.Reviewing QD (contamination) and QE (submersion) using Monte-Carlo methods.9.Considering the multi-path cumulative dose principle where simultaneous exposures may oc-cur. The review of items 1 to 4 has been completed; items 5 to 9 are in progress and discussion is pending on further work to be completed in the future.This paper will indicate the status of work that has been performed since 2016, explain the main changes in the calculation methods as well as the tools that have been developed to evaluate the Q values for any radionuclide, show results and describe the actions that are not yet completed. The WG expects the updated A values to be presented to the TRANSSC by 2021

  • Review of the A1 and A2 values: impact of all radiations on QA and QB
    HAL CCSD, 2019
    Co-Authors: Thomas Samuel, Bez Jeremy, Louis Baptiste
    Abstract:

    International audienceThe A1 and A2 values of the Q System described in the Advisory Material SSG-26 have been developed to provide maximum allowable contents in packages not designed to withstand ac-cidents. Current values were determined in 1996 according to specific scenarios for five expo-sure pathways. Since then, the ICRP has published revised radiological data. In September 2013, an international working group was created to discuss the improvement of calculation methods described in the Q System. Within this framework, it has been decided to change the current deterministic and empiric method to a more accurate one, based on Monte-Carlo calculations. This evolution allows the working group to be more flexible and to get more accurate results, for instance by taking into account all particles created. It is an important evolution as QA and QB, used to evaluate the effects of external exposure (in order to determine the A1 values), are only related to, respectively, effective dose due to pho-tons and skin equivalent dose due to electrons. The same issue exists for QD (contamination due to beta emissions only) and QE (exposure due to submersion in a noble gas). The evolution now allows to account for all radiations for all Q values.Of about a thousand radionuclides to be considered, the working group retained 6 well-known radionuclides (60Co, 154Eu, 134Cs, 192Ir, 85Kr, 18F) to firstly evaluate the consequences of this evolution on the QA and QB values. This list of 6 radionuclides was agreed because it con-tains different type of emitter (-) and covers a wide variety of use. Therefore, IRSN has analysed, for the working group, the contribution of each radiation (, Auger & internal conversion electrons, -) on the effective dose and on the skin equivalent dose to show the impact on the A1 values. The possible consequences on the transport of radioactive Materials will also be discussed.The new Q System would, once validated by the TRANSCC, be able to provide A1 and A2 values based on exposure from all radiations to all sensible organs and to the whole body and for at least two irradiation field