A Required Level of Enhancing Life Safety Derived from the Cost for Substituting Nuclear Energy in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the disastrous earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011, Japanese people have discussed the question of “How safe is safe enough?” The risk of spills from nuclear power plants is one of the major issues, and the government has shut down almost all nuclear power plants to re-evaluate the risk from each one. However, even after the re-evaluation, the nuclear power plants remain closed because many people do not agree with the evaluation, and they prefer to avoid as much risk as possible without fully understanding the cost of their demands. Currently, to sustain the electric demand with thermal power plants, Japan must import more fossil fuel at great cost. This study provides a comprehensible cost-benefit criterion for enhancing life safety. The criterion provides a required level of enhancing life safety which equivalents with the additional cost for substituting nuclear energy and importing other energy sources. This suggested criterion could be used as a benchmark to evaluate the actual reduced risk by prohibiting the nuclear power plants’ operation.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".