English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We point out serious inconsistencies of the first paper of the series,written by Makoto Miyazaki and Ryugo Hayano, which discusses the correlationbetween the personal doses of the citizens of Date City measured by glassbadges with the ambient dose rates measured by six airborne surveys. The lastof the six airborne survey was made in the period of 2014 Q3 (from October 2014to December 2014). The real number of participants of the period is about14,500; however, in Table 1 2014 Q3 it is written that the number ofparticipants is 21,080 and in Fig. 4f 21,052. We conclude that the analysis ofthe paper with respect to Table 1 2014 Q3 and Fig. 4f are done without usingreal correct data and we cannot obtain any meaningful information from thetable and figure. Since the period 2014 Q3 is also included in Fig. 5 of thesecond paper of the series, it is quite possible that Fig. 5 of the secondpaper is made on the basis of, at least partially, false data and is notreliable.

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