MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069863592 · doi:10.1115/icone18-30249

Bruce Power Aging Obsolescence Program

2010· article· en· W2069863592 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Cruchley, R. F. Dam, Ralf Gold, Brian Ferguson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)Bruce Power (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObsolescenceReliability engineeringSpare partTroubleshootingIdentification (biology)Component (thermodynamics)CriticalityNuclear power plantComputer scienceEngineeringSystems engineeringOperations managementBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Aging and Obsolescence Program (AOP) developed by AECL in cooperation with Bruce Power ensures that Bruce Power is able to proactively manage plant critical component vulnerabilities before failure, thereby improving unit forced outage rates and reliability. AOP involves application of INPO AP-913 guidance for aging and obsolescence. The process includes component criticality identification and prioritization, single point vulnerability identification, and development of the technical basis to support maintenance. This includes replace or repair strategies, identification of critical spare parts and stocking parameters, through to the identification and resolution of obsolescence issues. The program is applicable to all components in a plant, but is being applied initially to critical components. This includes all Bruce B criticality category 1 components and those components that have caused plant trips or outages The program was also expanded to include review of buried piping for both Bruce A and B, additional plant systems based upon health status, and heat exchangers. Critical Spare Parts and Obsolescence Assessments identify and manage critical spare parts and obsolescence for Bruce Power SSCs (structures, systems, and components) and optimize spare parts inventory, which is intended to meet both planned and un-planned demand. In order to facilitate implementation of the AOP, the project includes integration of the program into Bruce Power processes and procedures. The cooperation between Bruce Power and AECL on AOP began as a small pilot project in 2007 where the program and procedures were developed by analysis of a few select components. The paper describes the Bruce Power Aging Obsolescence Program, the novelties and improvements of this integrated methodology and progress made to date.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.363 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207