MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mechanical Aspects of the Canadian Generation IV Supercritical Water-Cooled Pressure Tube Reactor

2012· article· en· W2046212265 on OpenAlexafffundabout
M. Yetisir, M. Gaudet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSubcritical and Supercritical Water Processes
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsNuclear engineeringCoolantSupercritical fluidEnvironmental scienceElectricity generationFuel cycleWaste managementProcess engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringPower (physics)Chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is developing a next generation (Gen IV) reactor, the Canadian Super-Critical Water-cooled Reactor (SCWR), which has the potential of meeting all design goals of the Gen IV International Forum (GIF). These design goals include enhanced safety features (inherent safe operation and deploying passive safety features), improved economic and resource utilization (∼40% more efficient than current nuclear power generating stations, sustainable fuel cycle (will burn thorium, which is three times more abundant than uranium), enhanced sustainability, and greater proliferation resistance compared to the current fleets (i.e., Gen III and Gen III+) of reactors. The Canadian SCWR concept is a pressure-tube type reactor that uses supercritical water as a coolant, a separate low-pressure heavy water moderator, a high efficiency fuel channel that includes a zirconium alloy pressure and a ceramic zirconia insulator, and a direct steam power cycle. This paper presents the evolution of the Canadian SCWR core design, simplifications introduced in the design to deal with design challenges, and ongoing design activities.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSubcritical and Supercritical Water ProcessesFrench-language works237,207