Thermo-Economic Assessment of Advanced, High-Temperature CANDU Reactors
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
Research underway on the advanced CANDU examines new, innovative, reactor concepts with the aim of significant cost reduction and resource sustainability through improved thermodynamic efficiency and plant simplification. The so-called CANDU-X concept retains the key elements of the current CANDU designs, including heavy-water moderator that provides a passive heat sink and horizontal pressure tubes. Improvement in thermodynamic efficiency is sought via substantial increases in both pressure and temperature of the reactor coolant. Following on from the new Next Generation (NG) CANDU, which is ready for markets in 2005 and beyond, the reactor coolant is chosen to be light water but at supercritical operating conditions. Two different temperature regimes are being studied, Mark 1 and Mark 2, based respectively on continued use of zirconium or on stainless-steel-based fuel cladding. Three distinct cycle options have been proposed for Mark 1: the High-Pressure Steam Generator (HPSG) cycle, the Dual cycle, and the Direct cycle. For Mark 2, the focus is on simplification via a Direct cycle. This paper presents comparative thermo-economic assessments of the CANDU-X cycle options, with the ultimate goal of ascertaining which particular cycle option is the best overall in terms of thermodynamics and economics. A similar assessment was already performed for the NG CANDU. The economic analyses entail obtaining cost estimates of major plant components, such as heat exchangers, turbines and pumps.
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) | 0.003 | 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