MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283744486 · doi:10.13182/nse08-16

Determination of Operator Action Times during a Loss-of-Feedwater Event Using Extreme Value Statistics

2010· article· en· W2283744486 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Science and Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoiler feedwaterUncertainty analysisReliability engineeringLoss-of-coolant accidentStatisticsConfidence intervalComputer scienceMathematicsBoiler (water heating)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pursuit of more realistic models for nuclear power plant systems is becoming increasingly important and has led to an expansion in statistical uncertainty analysis coupled with the use of best-estimate predictions. Within these methodologies, derived acceptance criteria have been developed to ensure that the ultimate safety criteria are met with acceptably high levels of probability and confidence. The meeting of these derived criteria with a probability of 95% for a confidence interval of 95%, the 95/95 criteria, ensures consistency between analysis and instrumentation accuracy requirements set forth in ISA 67.04 standards. However, the application of these statistical methods to accidents requiring operator intervention, such as complete loss-of-feedwater events, has not previously been the topic of investigation. This paper applies the extreme value statistics (EVS) methodology to the steam generator–level transients predicted to result from a total loss-of-feedwater accident and compares the result to other uncertainty propagation methods and deterministic calculations. The transient was modeled using a full-circuit one-dimensional thermal-hydraulic code, and the epistemic and aleatory uncertainties inherent in the reactor are assessed. Based upon these results the available steam generator inventories at the time of trip were statistically determined, and subsequently, the available times for operator action were determined. Comparisons were made between the EVS methods and limiting deterministic analysis results for a standard CANDU 9 design as well as to other best-estimate and uncertainty-analysis techniques. Key uncertainties were identified based on phenomena identification and ranking tables and were confirmed through sensitivity studies. The requirement for operator-initiated actions for the EVS case was ∼46 min with 95% probability and 95% confidence from the time of annunciation, and this was 30 min longer than the limiting deterministic case.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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