MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overview of Recent Research Activities of Monte Carlo Simulation in Japan

2000· article· en· W2053868262 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Science and Technology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodMonte Carlo molecular modelingDynamic Monte Carlo methodQuantum Monte CarloStatistical physicsComputer sciencePhysicsMarkov chain Monte CarloMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes recent progresses of the Monte Carlo simulation technology in nuclear energy field in Japan. Radiation shielding solution method using the Monte Carlo had been validated as a reliable tool through the discussion of “Radiation Shielding Safety Demonstration Analysis Group” of Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute. Since 1996, “Monte Carlo Simulation Working Group” has been accumulating use experiences of Monte Carlo codes in the wide range of nuclear energy field. This working group is planing to publish “Guideline of Monte Carlo Simulations” during FY-99. This “Guideline” is expected to be a first Japanese practical textbook of Monte Carlo calculation. In 1998, the first full-scale topical conference on Monte Carlo simulation was held in Tokyo. “Research Committee on Particle Simulation with the Monte Carlo Method” was established in Atomic Energy Society of Japan in 1998. This committee is composed of more than seventy members from many fields of nuclear energy research in Japan. This committee is expected to be a core that will drive the research and development activity of Monte Carlo calculation in Japan.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.264 · 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