Alternate Flaw Acceptance Criterial for Flaws in Ferritic Steel Vessels Operating in the Upper Shelf Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ASME Section XI flaw evaluation rules for ferritic vessels (IWB-3610/3620 plus Appendix A) are based on Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) techniques and were developed primarily for the irradiated RPV beltline region and other low temperature carbon and low-alloy steel applications in which the material exhibits limited or no ductility prior to failure. There are situations in which ferritic steel components operate at the upper shelf region and therefore exhibit ample ductility and increased flaw tolerance. Application of LEFM techniques to these cases is very conservative. In order to address flaw evaluation of ferritic materials exhibiting upper shelf toughness and high ductility, the ASME Section XI draft Code Case N-749 was developed and is currently under committee review. This proposed Code Case requires alternate acceptance criteria for situations in which the component is operating in the upper shelf temperature region and therefore possesses adequate ductility to allow the use of Elastic Plastic Fracture Mechanics (EPFM) techniques.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".