Bibliographic record
Abstract
Korean energy security is dependent on the peaceful and safe utilization of nuclear energy. The Korean government’s policy on nuclear energy can be summarized with two principles: promoting the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and ensuring its safe use and storage. Since April 1978 Korea has strongly relied on nuclear energy for its electricity generation. As of today, 20 nuclear power plants, 16 pressurized water reactors PWRs and 4 Canada Deuterium Uranium CANDU reactors are in operation, and 4 PWRs are under construction. The installed nuclear capacity is 17.7 GWe, representing 27% of the nation’s total installed capacity. The nuclear share in electricity remains at around 37.8%, reaching a level of 146.8 TWh. New power reactors in Korea Standard Nuclear Power Plants are fully designed by domestic technologies. A more advanced reactor named AP1400 will be commissioned in 2020. The Achilles’ heel of nuclear energy is radioactive waste. Even though proper scientific management of radioactive waste has been found and proved safe for lowand intermediate-level waste LILW disposal and an interim storage of spent nuclear fuel and even the introduction of permanent disposal of high-level radioactive waste HLW is envisaged to be feasible, the public perception on these issues is not supportive. The public’s everlasting “not in my backyard” refrain has hindered the implementation of Korea’s radioactive waste management program for the last two decades. Overcoming the safety issues involved in radioactive waste management is not a simple scientific problem. It requires attention to both state-of-the-art science and technology and the psychology of the general and local public. In fact, it is a transscientific issue, a fusion of science and socioeconomic studies. The Korean Atomic Energy Commission provided clear milestones for constructing two key facilities: the LILW repository by 2008 and the centralized storage for spent fuel by 2016. With the full support of the Korean government, institutes, and general public, Korea Hydro Nuclear Power KHNP secured a site for the LILW repository in 2005. An underground repository with the capacity for 100,000 drums is under construction, and will be in commission by 2012. Long-term safe management of spent nuclear fuel is necessary not only to store spent fuel over a long period of time but also to potentially recycle it under full observance of the nuclear nonproliferation duties. The permanent disposal of HLW is the research and development R&D topic for a future generation and involves protecting the environment and minimizing the economic burden. Since 1997 Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute KAERI has been developing a permanent disposal facility for HLW and a total system performance assessment TSPA . Its current R&D activities are focused on the preliminary conceptual design of the Korean Reference Disposal System KRS , development of the
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".