Qualification of Reactor Physics Toolset for a Thorium-Fuelled CANDU Reactor
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AECL has developed enhanced versions of the reactor physics computer codes for analysis of CANDU® reactors and the ACR-1000™. The central codes that comprise the analysis toolset are WIMS-AECL (a lattice code), RFSP (a core code) and MCNP5 (a Monte Carlo code). The toolset, with ENDF/B-VI nuclear data, has been validated for application to the ACR-1000 design. In addition to comparisons of code predictions against relevant experiments conducted in AECL’s ZED-2 critical facility, advanced methods based on cross-section sensitivity/uncertainty (S/U) analysis were used to extend the results of bias and uncertainty in reactivity coefficients, derived from analysis of ZED-2 tests, to the ACR-1000 reactor. The validation of this toolset with ENDF/B-VII nuclear data is proposed for application to analysis of a Thorium-fuelled CANDU Reactor (TCR). The TCR is based on the Enhanced CANDU 6™ (EC6™) reactor [1] and would operate with a fuel design that incorporates both low-enriched uranium (LEU) oxide and thorium oxide fuel elements in the same fuel bundle to achieve enhanced fuel and core performance with thorium fuel. For the initial TCR toolset qualification, important reactor physics phenomena would be validated using several relevant ZED-2 experiments performed in the past. Results from experiments with a variety of oxide fuels are available, including plutonium/thorium (Pu/Th), 233U/Th, 235U/Th, LEU and CANDU-MOX (containing a mixture of plutonium, uranium and dysprosium to simulate the reactor physics affects of fuel burnup). Taken together along with other relevant experimental data, these experiments would be expected to address the important isotopes and many phenomena for the TCR and to enable the validation of the reactor physics toolset for this design. Additional confirmatory experiments would reduce uncertainties. This paper describes the qualification process, including validation, which is proposed to support the use of the reactor physics toolset for the TCR.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it