MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067524212 · doi:10.12943/anr.2014.00035

PRELIMINARY METHODOLOGY FOR THE ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSAL REACTOR USING INTEGRATED SEVERE ACCIDENT MODELLING CODES

2015· article· en· W2067524212 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Andrew Morreale, Morgan J. Brown, Sergei M. Petoukhov

Bibliographic record

VenueAECL Nuclear Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsBoiling water reactorNuclear engineeringEngineeringAccident (philosophy)Accident analysisEnvironmental scienceForensic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Research Universal (NRU) Reactor is a multi-purpose research reactor located at Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) Chalk River Laboratories. The severe accident case for the NRU has been explored through deterministic and probabilistic safety analysis (PSA) including multi-level PSAs that detail the progression and consequences of a severe accident in the NRU. These previous calculations lack the interconnected and comprehensive features of a full severe accident modelling code that is now the standard for severe accident analysis of power reactors. It was of interest within AECL to evaluate modern severe accident modelling codes to the NRU reactor case to enhance the understanding of accident progression and predict the system damage and radiation release consequences of a severe accident, which is a very low probability event. The NRU is smaller and operates at a lower power than the large scale power reactors (e.g., pressurized heavy water reactors, pressurized water reactors, and boiling water reactors) that these codes were designed to analyze. Additionally, the NRU has a unique design different from the power reactors and several features relevant to severe accidents including filtered venting, large passive heat sinks, and a dispersion fuel design of uranium-silicide in an aluminum matrix. The major severe accident analysis codes available to AECL and their applicability to the NRU are explored in this paper. In addition, a preliminary strategy for employing the most applicable codes to the NRU for the purposes of severe accident modelling is proposed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.763
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAECL Nuclear ReviewSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207