MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979109955 · doi:10.1115/1.4001295

ASTEC, COCOSYS, and LIRIC Interpretation of the Iodine Behavior in the Large-Scale THAI Test Iod-9

2010· article· en· W1979109955 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gunther H. Weber, L. Bosland, F. Funke, Glenn A. Glowa, T. Kanzleiter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
FundersBundesministerium für Wirtschaft und TechnologieEuropean CommissionAreva
KeywordsIodineSump (aquarium)Environmental scienceRadiochemistryNuclear engineeringChemistryMaterials scienceWaste managementEngineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The large-scale iodine test Iod-9 of the German Thermal hydraulics, Hydrogen, Aerosols, Iodine (THAI) program was jointly interpreted by means of post-test analyses within the THAI Circle of the Severe Accident Research NETwork (SARNET)/Work Package 16. In this test, molecular iodine (I2) was injected into the vessel dome of the 60 m3 THAI vessel to observe the evolution of its distribution between water, gas, and surfaces. The main processes addressed in Iod-9 are (a) the mass transfer of I2 between the gas and the two sumps, (b) the iodine transport in the main sump when it is stratified and then mixed, and (c) the I2 adsorption onto, and desorption from, the vessel walls in the presence and absence of wall condensation. The codes applied by the THAI Circle partners were the Accident Source Term Evaluation Code (ASTEC)-IODE (IRSN, Saint Paul Lez Durance, France), Containment Code System (COCOSYS)-Advanced Iodine Model (AIM) (GRS, Garching, Germany), and Library of Iodine Reactions in Containment (LIRIC; AECL, Chalk River, ON, Canada). ASTEC-IODE and the Advanced Iodine Model (AIM) are semi-empirical iodine models integrated in the lumped-parameter codes ASTEC and COCOSYS, respectively. With both codes multicompartment iodine calculations can be performed. LIRIC is a mechanistic iodine model for single stand-alone calculations. The simulation results are compared with each other and with the experimental measurements. Special issues that were encountered during this work were studied in more details: I2 diffusion in the sump water, I2 reaction with the steel of the vessel wall in gaseous and aqueous phases, and I2 mass transfer from the gas to the sump. Iodine transport and behavior in THAI test Iod-9 are fairly well simulated by ASTEC-IODE, COCOSYS-AIM, and LIRIC in post-test calculations. The measured iodine behavior is well understood and all measured data are found to be consistent. The very slow iodine transport within the stratified main sump was simulated with COCOSYS only, in a qualitative way. Consequently, this work highlighted the need to improve modeling of (a) the wet iodine adsorption and the washdown from the walls, (b) the I2 mass transfer between gas and sump, and (c) the I2/steel reaction in the gaseous and aqueous phases. In any case, the analysis of the large-scale iodine test Iod-9 has been an important validation step for the codes applied.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207