Nuclear waste disposal—pyrochlore (A2B2O7): Nuclear waste form for the immobilization of plutonium and “minor” actinides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the past half-century, the nuclear fuel cycle has generated approximately 1400 metric tons of plutonium and substantial quantities of the “minor” actinides, such as Np, Am, and Cm. The successful disposition of these actinides has an important impact on the strategy for developing advanced nuclear fuel cycles, weapons proliferation, and the geologic disposal of high-level radioactive waste. During the last decade, there has been substantial interest in the use of the isometric pyrochlore structure-type, A2B2O7, for the immobilization of actinides. Most of the interest has focused on titanate-pyrochlore because of its chemical durability; however, these compositions experience a radiation-induced transition from the crystalline-to-aperiodic state due to radiation damage from the alpha-decay of actinides. Depending on the actinide concentration, the titanate pyrochlore will become amorphous in less than 1000 years of storage. Recently, systematic ion beam irradiations of a variety of pyrochlore compositions has revealed that many zirconate pyrochlores do not become amorphous, but remain crystalline as a defect fluorite structure-type due to disordering of the A- and B-site cations. The zirconate pyrochlores will remain crystalline even to very high doses, greater than 100 displacements per atom. Systematic experimental studies of actinide-doped and ion beam-irradiated pyrochlore, analyses of natural U- and Th-bearing pyrochlore, and simulations of the energetics of the disordering process now provide a rather detailed understanding of the structural and chemical controls on the response of pyrochlore to radiation. These results provide a solid basis for predicting the behavior and durability of pyrochlore used to immobilize plutonium.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".