Reduction of bias in neutron multiplicity assay using a weighted point model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate assay of most common plutonium samples was the development goal for the nondestructive assay technique of neutron multiplicity counting. Over the past 20 years the technique has been proven for relatively pure oxides and small metal items. Unfortunately, the technique results in large biases when assaying large metal items. Limiting assumptions, such as unifoh multiplication, in the point model used to derive the multiplicity equations causes these biases for large dense items. A weighted point model has been developed to overcome some of the limitations in the standard point model. Weighting factors are detemiined from Monte Carlo calculations using the MCNPX code. Monte Carlo calculations give the dependence of the weighting factors on sample mass and geometry, and simulated assays using Monte Carlo give the theoretical accuracy of the weighted-point-model assay. Measured multiplicity data evaluated with both the standard and weighted point models are compared to reference values to give the experimental accuracy of the assay. Initial results show significant promise for the weighted point model in reducing or eliminating biases in the neutron multiplicity assay of metal items. The negative biases observed in the assay of plutonium metal samples are caused by variations in the neutron multiplication for neutrons originating in various locations in the sample. The bias depends on the mass and shape of the sample and depends on the amount and energy distribution of the ({alpha},n) neutrons in the sample. When the standard point model is used, this variable-multiplication bias overestimates the multiplication and alpha values of the sample, and underestimates the plutonium mass. The weighted point model potentially can provide assay accuracy of {approx}2% (1 {sigma}) for cylindrical plutonium metal samples < 4 kg with {alpha} < 1 without knowing the exact shape of the samples, provided that the ({alpha},n) source is uniformly distributed throughout the sample and has an average neutron energy close to the O({alpha},n) average neutron energy. Better assay results can be obtained if there is some knowledge of the plutonium geometry, because weighting factor curves can be calculated for any specified geometry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".