The State-of-the-Art Theory and Applications of Best-Estimate Plus Uncertainty Methods
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The approval of the revised rule on the acceptance of emergency core cooling system performance in 1988 triggered a significant interest in the development of codes and methodologies for uncertainty evaluation of best-estimate loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) analyses. The code scaling, applicability, and uncertainty evaluation method was developed and demonstrated for a large-break LOCA in a pressurized water reactor. Later, several new best-estimate plus uncertainty methods (BEPUs) were developed around the world. The purpose of this paper is to identify and compare the statistical approaches of BEPU methods and present their importance for licensing applications in nuclear power plants. The study showed that the uncertainty analysis with random sampling of input parameters, using the nonparametric statistical tolerance limits for estimating uncertainty of output parameters, is the commonly accepted approach today. The existing BEPU methods seem mature enough, while the future research may be focused on the codes with internal assessment of uncertainty.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it