MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086583263 · doi:10.1115/icone10-22719

Next Generation CANDU Performance Assurance

2002· article· en· W2086583263 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Wren, P. J. Allsop, J. M. Hopwood

Bibliographic record

Venue10th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Volume 2 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability engineeringSystems engineeringElectricity generationQuality assuranceRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceNew product developmentEngineeringOperations managementPower (physics)Business

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AECL is developing a next generation CANDU design to meet market requirements for low cost, reliable energy supplies. The primary product development objective is to achieve a capital cost substantially lower than the current nuclear plant costs, such that the next generation plant will be competitive with alternative options for large-scale base-load electricity supply. However, other customer requirements, including safety, low-operating costs and reliable performance, are being addressed as equally important design requirements. The main focus of this paper is to address the development directions that will provide performance assurance. The next generation CANDU is an evolutionary extension of the proven CANDU 6 design. There are eight CANDU 6 units in operation in four countries around the world and further three units are under construction. These units provide a sound basis for projecting highly reliable performance for the next generation CANDU. In addition, the next generation CANDU program includes development and qualification activities that will address the new features and design extensions in the advanced plant. To limit product development risk and to enhance performance assurance, the next generation CANDU design features and performance parameters have been carefully reviewed during the concept development phase and have been deliberately selected so as to be well founded on the existing CANDU knowledge base. Planned research and development activities are required only to provide confirmation of the projected performance within a modest extension of the established database. Necessary qualification tests will be carried out within the timeframe of the development program, to establish a proven design prior to the start of a construction project. This development support work coupled with ongoing AECL programs to support and enhance the performance and reliability of the existing CANDU plants will provide sound assurance that the next generation CANDU plants will meet customer expectations.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.007

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue10th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Volume 2Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207