MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069284504 · doi:10.1080/00268976.2014.897396

Prediction of the thermophysical properties of molten salt fast reactor fuel from first-principles

2014· article· en· W2069284504 on OpenAlexaff
Aïmen E. Gheribi, Dario Corradini, Leslie Dewan, Patrice Chartrand, Christian Simon, P.A. Madden, Mathieu Salanne

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMolten saltCoolantHeat capacityMolten salt reactorThermodynamicsLithium fluorideViscosityThermal conductivityNuclear fuelChemistryHeat transferMaterials scienceNuclear engineeringInorganic chemistryNuclear chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molten fluorides are known to show favourable thermophysical properties which make them good candidate coolants for nuclear fission reactors. Here we investigate the special case of mixtures of lithium fluoride and thorium fluoride, which act both as coolant and as fuel in the molten salt fast reactor concept. By using ab initio parameterised polarisable force fields, we show that it is possible to calculate the whole set of properties (density, thermal expansion, heat capacity, viscosity and thermal conductivity) which are necessary for assessing the heat transfer performance of the melt over the whole range of compositions and temperatures. We then deduce from our calculations several figures of merit which are important in helping the optimisation of the design of molten salt fast reactors.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.154
Teacher spread0.140 · 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
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

Citations55
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular PhysicsSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207