MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063357935 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450810220

Recovery of Tritium from Wastewater Generated by Decommissioning of Gas Cooled Reactors (GCR)

2003· article· en· W2063357935 on OpenAlex
Kenji Takeshita, Yoshio Nnakano, Masami Shimizu

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFusion materials and technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear decommissioningTritiumWaste managementEnvironmental scienceWastewaterNuclear engineeringEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The recovery of tritium from wastewater generated by the decommissioning of a 166‐MWe GCR, Tokai‐1, nuclear reactor was evaluated. The dimensions of two tritium separation columns, water distillation process and hydrogen‐isotope exchange with hydrophobic Pt‐catalyst, were evaluated numerically under the assumptions that the recovery of tritium from the wastewater would be completed in five years and the wastewater after the recovery of tritium would be suitable for release into the environment. It was found that, in addition to lower steam, the column was smaller than that for the water distillation process. The hydrogen‐isotope exchange process was suitable for the treatment of wastewater, not only for a process design point of view but also for a reduction of energy consumption.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.171 · 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