MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074335268 · doi:10.1115/icone17-75603

Thermal Fatigue in CANDU Stations

2009· article· en· W2074335268 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1: Plant Operations, Maintenance, Engineering, Modifications and Life Cycle; Component Reliability and Materials Issues; Next Generation Systems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
FundersCANDU Owners Group
KeywordsPipingNuclear engineeringThermal hydraulicsThermal stratificationThermalEnvironmental scienceBoilingThermal fatigueNuclear reactorTurbulenceHeat transferEngineeringMechanicsMeteorologyPhysicsEnvironmental engineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risk of thermal fatigue, and the resulting pressure boundary failures, have resulted in a significant amount of research in the Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) and Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) communities in the past two decades. Thermal stresses arising from thermal stratification phenomena are typically not taken into account in design calculations. Because various forms of thermal fatigue events occurred in safety-related piping, non-design basis thermal fatigue has been the subject of a number of U.S. NRC bulletins that led to a significant amount of research by the nuclear industry. This paper discusses the relevance of known thermal fatigue mechanisms to the CANDU® design (a pressurized heavy water reactor), and thermal fatigue operational experience in CANDU plants. These mechanisms are various forms of thermal stratification phenomena, turbulence penetration and large-scale temperature oscillations in mixing fluid streams.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.194 · 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