A Presentation of the OPTEX Reflector Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the OPTEX reflector model for obtaining few-group reflector parameters consistent with a reference power distribution in the core. The reference power distribution is obtained using a 142 872-region calculation defined over a two-dimensional eighth-of-core pressurized water reactor (PWR) and performed with the method of characteristics. The OPTEX method is based on generalized perturbation theory and uses an optimization algorithm known as parametric linear complementarity pivoting. The proposed model leads to few-group diffusion coefficients or P1-weighted macroscopic total cross sections that can be used to represent the reflector in full-core calculations. These few-group parameters can be spatially heterogeneous in order to correctly represent steel baffles and thermal shields present in modern PWRs. The optimal reflector parameters are compared with those obtained with a flux-volume weighting of the reflector cross sections recovered from the reference calculation. Important improvements in full-core power distribution are observed when the optimal parameters are used.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it