Free Access
Issue
Radioprotection
Volume 42, Number 3, July-September 2007
Page(s) 277 - 295
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro:2007005
Published online 19 September 2007
  • Aarkrog A. (1979) Environmental studies on radioecological sensitivity and variability with special emphasis on the fallout nuclides 90Sr and 137Cs, In Ris-R-437, Ris National Laboratory (Denmark). [Google Scholar]
  • Anselin L. (1995) Local Indicators of Spatial Association – LISA, Geograph. Anal. 27, 93-115. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • AVAIL (2002) Arctic Vulnerability to Radioactive Contamination, Final Report, Contract number IC15-CT98-0201, Borghuis A.M., Liland A., Strand P. (Eds), Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority. [Google Scholar]
  • Baudrit C. (2005) Représentation et propagation de connaissances imprécises et incertaines : application à l'évaluation des risques liés aux sites et aux sols pollués, Thèse soutenue le 19 octobre 2005, Université de Toulouse III (Informatique). [Google Scholar]
  • Breiman L., Friedman J.H., Olshen R., Stone C.J. (1984) Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont CA. U.S.A. [Google Scholar]
  • Briand B., Mercat-Rommens C. (2006) Difficulties and lessons of environmental data processing to fit modelling parameters, SETAC Europe 16th Annual Meeting, 7-11 May 2006, La Hague, The Netherlands. [Google Scholar]
  • Briand B., Mercat-Rommens C., Ducharme G. (2006) Apport de la biostatistique à la radioécologie de terrain, 38es journées de statistique, Clamart, 29 mai-2 juin 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • Brisson N., Gary C., Justes E., Mary B., Roche R., Ripoche D., Zimmer D., Sierra J., Bertuzzi P., Burger P., Bussière F., Cabidoche Y.M., Cellier P., Debaeke P., Gaudillère J.P., Maraux F., Seguin F.B., Sinoquet H. (2003) An overview of the crop model STICS, Eur. J. Agron. 18, 309-332. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chojnacki E., Ousny A. (1996) Description of the IPSN method for the uncertainty and sensitivity analysis and the associated software: SUNSET, in : ASME/JSME ICONE 4 Proceedings, Louisiana, USA. 3, 545-550. [Google Scholar]
  • Dempster A. (1967) Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivalued Mapping, Ann. Math. Stat. 38, 325-339. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Descamps B., Guillet F. (2003) Enquête alimentaire dans trois secteurs de la Basse vallée du Rhône : Codolet, Tresques, Camargue. Consommation /Autoconsommation, Radioprotection 38, 299-322. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Duffa C., Mercat-Rommens C., Thébault H. (2007) Radioecological sensitivity project on the French Mediterranean costal environment, 38e Congrès de la CIESM, Mediterranean Science Commission, Istanbul, Turquie, 9-13 avril 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • Durand V., Vray F., Mercat-Rommens C. (2006) Improving the knowledge of exposure by ingestion thanks to food surveys, International ISEE/ISEA Conference, Paris, 2-8 September 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • Durand V., Mercat-Rommens C., Curmi P., Benoit M., Briand B. (2007) Modelling regional impacts of radioactive pollution on permanent grassland, J. Agronomy (sous presse). [Google Scholar]
  • Eriksson A. (1997) Basic data for decisions on remediation of agricultural areas after a radioactive fallout, A report to the Swedish National Expert Group on Cleanup Swedish Radiation Protection Authority, Stockholm. [Google Scholar]
  • Eyrolle F., Louvat D., Métivier J.M., Rolland B. (2005) Origins and levels of artificial radionuclides within the Rhône river waters (France) for the last forty years: Towards an evaluation of the radioecological sensitivity of river systems, Radioprotection 40, 435-446. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Howard B.J., Wright S.M., Barnett C.L. (Eds.) (1999) Spatial analysis of vulnerable ecosystems in Europe: spatial and dynamic prediction of radiocesium fluxes into European foods (SAVE), Final report, 65 pp. Commission of the European Communities. [Google Scholar]
  • Howard B.J. et al. (2002) Radioecological Sensitivity Final Report, September 1998-March 2001, Center for Ecology and Hydrology, Natural Environment Research Council, March 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • IFREMER (1997) Atlas pour la préparation à la lutte et pour la lutte contre les pollutions marines accidentelles sur les côtes de Tunisie, application à la région de Sfax, Rapport de fin des phases I et II, avril 1997, Étude IFREMER, EMP, CEDRE, ENIS, REMPEC/IMO/UNEP. [Google Scholar]
  • INSEE (1991) Consommation et lieux d'achats des produits alimentaires en 1991, France, Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. [Google Scholar]
  • Iosjpe M., Brown J., Strand P. (2002) Modified approach for box modelling of radiological consequences from releases into the marine environment, J. Environm. Radioact. 60, 91-103. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Le Ber F., Benoit M., Schott C., Mari J.-F., Mignolet C. (2006) Studying crop sequences with CarrotAge, a HMM-based data mining software, Ecol Model. 191, 170-185. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maystre L.Y., Pictet J., Simos J. (1994) Méthodes multicritères ELECTRE. Collection Gérer l’environnement, Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires Romandes (Lausanne, Suisse). [Google Scholar]
  • Mercat-Rommens C., Renaud P. (2005a) From field studies to risk management: the SENSIB Project, Radioprotection 40, S785-S790. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Mercat-Rommens C., Renaud P. (2005b) From radioecological sensibility to risk management: the SENSIB Project. 2nd International Conference on radioactivity in the environment, Nice, 2-6 October 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • Mercat-Rommens C., Chojnacki E., Merle-Szeremeta A., Brenot J., Sugier A. (2002) La nécessaire prise en compte des incertitudes dans les évaluations de risque : l'exemple du Groupe radioécologie Nord-Cotentin (GRNC), Environnement, Risques et Santé 5/6, 276-282. [Google Scholar]
  • Mercat-Rommens C., Chojnacki E., Baudrit C. (2005) Représentation et propagation de la connaissance imprécise : ce que les théories de l'incertain peuvent apporter aux sciences environnementales, 17es journées scientifiques de la société d'écologie humaine, Arles, 23-25 novembre 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • Mercat-Rommens C., Chojnacki E., Baudrit C. (2006a) Ce que les théories de l'incertain peuvent apporter à l'évaluation des risques, Conférence λµ15 « Risques et Performances », Lille, 10-12 octobre 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • Mercat-Rommens C., Metivier J.M., Briand B., Durand V. (2006b) How geostatistics can help in predicting the level of radioactive contamination of cereals, 6th European Conference of Geostatistics for Environmental Applications, 25-27 October 2006, Rhodes, Grèce. [Google Scholar]
  • Moran P. (1950) Notes on continuous stochastic phenomena, Biometrika 37, 17-23. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mourlon C., Calmon P. (2002) ASTRAL: a code for assessing situations after a nuclear accident, 12th annual meeting of SETAC Europe, Vienna, 12-16 May 2002, site Internet ASTRAL : http://www.irsn-astral.org. [Google Scholar]
  • Müller H., Pröhl G. (1993) ECOSYS-87: A dynamic model for assessing radiological consequences of nuclear accident, Health Phys. 64, 232-250. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Renaud P., Louvat D. (2004) Magnitude of fission product depositions from atmospheric nuclear weapon test fallout in France, Health Phys. 86, 353-358 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Rommens C., Morin A, Merle-Szeremeta A. (1999) Le modèle FOCON d'évaluation de l'impact dosimétrique des rejets radioactifs atmosphériques des installations nucléaires en fonctionnement normal, Radioprotection 34, 195-209. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Strand P., Balonov M., Bewers M., Howard B.J., Tsaturov Y., Salo A. et al. (Eds.) (1997) Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program. AMAP, Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority (Oslo). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.