MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138377557 · doi:10.1051/ndata:07594

Assessment of evaluated (n,d) energy-angle elastic scattering distributions using MCNP simulations of critical measurements and simplified calculation benchmarks

2007· article· en· W2138377557 on OpenAlexaff
K. S. Kozier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeuteriumNuclear dataNuclear physicsRADIUSCritical radiusNeutronScatteringPhysicsNeutron scatteringElastic scatteringComputational physicsOpticsSPHERES

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different evaluated (n,d) energy-angle elastic scattering distributions produce k-effective differences in MCNP5 simulations of critical experiments involving heavy water (D 2 O) of sufficient magnitude to suggest a need for new (n,d) scattering measurements and/or distributions derived from modern theoretical nuclear models, especially at neutron energies below a few MeV.The present work focuses on the small reactivity change of <1 mk that is observed in the MCNP5 D 2 O coolant-void-reactivity calculation bias for simulations of two pairs of critical experiments performed in the ZED-2 reactor at the Chalk River Laboratories when different nuclear data libraries are used for deuterium.The deuterium data libraries tested include ENDF/B-VII.0,ENDF/B-VI.4,JENDL-3.3 and a new evaluation, labelled Bonn-B, which is based on recent theoretical nuclear-model calculations.Comparison calculations were also performed for a simplified, two-region, spherical model having an inner, 250-cm radius, homogeneous sphere of UO 2 , without and with deuterium, and an outer 20-cm-thick deuterium reflector.

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)0.007
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207