MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326276426 · doi:10.12943/anr.2013.00011

A New Safety Principle For The Slowpoke Reactor

2013· article· en· W2326276426 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Shijing Yue, S. Polugari, V. Anghel, Jöns Hilborn, B. Sur

Bibliographic record

VenueAECL Nuclear Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear engineeringCriticalityReactivity (psychology)Control rodLimitingEnriched uraniumChemistryMaterials scienceUraniumEngineeringPhysicsNuclear physicsMechanical engineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SLOWPOKE-2 (LEU core) is a pool-type nuclear reactor with a maximum nominal thermal power of 20 kW. It uses a pelletized uranium oxide fuel (19.9% enrichment) and provides a useful high neutron flux in the order of 1012 n.cm2s-1. The key safety features built into the reactor design are the strictly limited amount of excess reactivity and the negative reactivity feedback characteristics, which provide a demonstrably safe self-limiting power excursion response to large reactivity insertions. However, the limited amount of excess reactivity also limits continuous prolonged reactor operation at full power. With a 4 mk excess reactivity, the reactor can operate for about one day at full power, 20 kW, before criticality is lost due to temperature effects and xenon poisoning. A new safety concept is proposed in this paper that enables the continuous operation to a few months by increasing the excess reactivity from 4 mk to 8 mk. A Matlab/simulink model of SLOWPOKE-2 has demonstrated that core operation life can be extended to several months without adding a beryllium shim.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAECL Nuclear ReviewSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207