MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2279218329 · doi:10.1115/1.4031772

TRICO II Core Inventory Calculation and its Radiological Consequence Analyses

2016· article· en· W2279218329 on OpenAlexaff
Jérémie Lunguya Muswema, Gracien Bakambo Ekoko, Joseph Lobo, V. Lukanda, Emmanuel Boafo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersInternational Atomic Energy Agency
KeywordsTRIGANuclear engineeringNuclear reactor coreRadiological weaponResearch reactorEnvironmental scienceCrashNuclear reactorComputer scienceEngineeringNuclear physicsPhysicsNeutronRadiochemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two severe accident scenarios are investigated in this paper as they have never been considered previously in the safety analysis report (SAR) of the Congo TRIGA Mark II research reactor (TRICO II) in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of Congo. The source term is derived from the reactor core after two postulated accidents: (1) a large plane crash with total destruction of the reactor building and (2) full damage of one fuel element while the reactor building remains intact. Total effective dose (TED), after core inventory, and dose profiles to human organs are derived to assess the operational safety of the reactor. Results from the study will be used to upgrade the current SAR of the reactor as the reactor safety and licensing concepts are changing over the years; the knowledge and lessons learned from the past experience are being updated accordingly with the available data. TEDs to workers of the facility show that higher values are obtained at areas near the source term at the time of the plane crash accident, which dies out as quickly as the plume is carried away following predominant meteorological conditions at the site. The situation with one fuel element totally damaged poses no threat as far as radiation protection is concerned and reveals a maximum TED of 1.30×10−7 mSv at 100 m from the reactor core. This shows that the operation of this type of research reactor is reliable and safe.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studiesFrench-language works237,207