Computer Code Applicability Assessment for the Advanced CANDU Reactor
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
AECL Technologies (AECLT), the 100%-owned US subsidiary of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL), is currently the proponents of a pre-licensing review of the Advanced CANDU® Reactor (ACR™)* with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC). A key focus topic for this pre-application review is the NRC acceptance of the computer codes used in the safety analysis of the ACR. These codes have been developed and their predictions compared against experimental results over extended periods of time in Canada. These codes have also undergone formal validation in the 1990’s. In support of this formal validation effort AECL has developed, implemented and currently maintains a Software Quality Assurance program (SQA) to ensure that its analytical, scientific and design computer codes meet the required standards for software used in safety analyses. This paper discusses the SQA program used to develop, qualify and maintain the computer codes used in ACR safety analysis, including the current program underway to confirm the applicability of these computer codes for use in ACR safety analyses.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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