Uncertainty quantification for severe-accident reactor modelling: Results and conclusions of the MUSA reactor applications work package
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
• Challenges of BEPU method in Severe Accident modelling are explored. • Uncertainty analysis broadens the understanding of Severe Accident sequences • Applications demonstrate the level of readiness for BEPU in Severe Accident modelling. • A large data base of BEPU reactor applications is created in MUSA. The recently completed Horizon-2020 project “Management and Uncertainties of Severe Accidents (MUSA)” has reviewed uncertainty sources and Uncertainty Quantification methodology for assessing Severe Accidents (SA), and has made a substantial effort at stimulating uncertainty applications in predicting the radiological Source Term of reactor and Spent Fuel Pool accident scenarios. The key motivation of the project has been to bring the advantages of the Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty approach to the field of Severe Accident modelling. With respect to deterministic analyses, expected gains are avoiding adopting conservative assumptions, identifying uncertainty bands of estimates, and gaining insights into dominating uncertain parameters. Also, the benefits for understanding and improving Accident Management were to be explored. The reactor applications brought together a large group of participants that set out to apply uncertainty analysis (UA) within their field of SA modelling expertise – in particular reactor types, but also SA code used (ASTEC, MELCOR, MAAP, RELAP/SCDAPSIM), uncertainty quantification tools used (DAKOTA, SUSA, URANIE, self-developed tools based on Python code), detailed accident scenarios, and in some cases SAM actions. The setting up of the analyses, challenges faced during that phase, and solutions explored, are described in Brumm et al. ANE 191 (2023). This paper synthesizes the reactor-application work at the end of the project. Analyses of 23 partners are presented in different categories, depending on whether their main goal is/are (i) uncertainty bands of simulation results; (ii) the understanding of dominating uncertainties in specific sub-models of the SA code; (iii) improving the understanding of specific accident scenarios, with or without the application of SAM actions; or, (iv) a demonstration of the tools used and developed, and of the capability to carry out an uncertainty analysis in the presence of the challenges faced. A cross-section of the partners’ results is presented and briefly discussed, to provide an overview of the work done, and to encourage accessing and studying the project deliverables that are open to the public. Furthermore, the partners’ experiences made during the project have been evaluated and are presented as good practice recommendations. The paper ends with conclusions on the level of readiness of UA in SA modelling, on the determination of governing uncertainties, and on the analysis of SAM actions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle