MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328291661 · doi:10.14248/jkosse.2014.10.1.049

Development of a Safety Assessment System on Aging Management in Existing CANDU Steam Generators

2014· article· en· W2328291661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
So Eun Shin, Jeong Hun Lee, Tong Kyu Park, Jong Yeob Jung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Korea Society of Systems Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability engineeringNuclear power plantBoiler (water heating)Nuclear engineeringSystem safetyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringWaste managementNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since steam generator (SG) tubes are located in the boundary between the primary and secondary systems of nuclear power plant (NPP), the SG is one of the most important components in the aspects of the safety of NPP. The magnetite ( $Fe_30_4$ ) deposition, so-called fouling, is generally known as a major aging mechanism of CANDU SGs, and this aging mechanism makes the heat transfer efficiency between the primary and secondary systems of NPP reduced. Therefore, the development of SG safety assessment system which can evaluate the effect of the SG aging degradation mechanism should be needed for safety of NPP. In this study, through the suggestion of the guideline for SG safety assessment, it is possible to strengthen the basic of establishing the effective SG aging management technique. The SG safety assessment is carried out by CATHENA(Canadian Algorithm for THErmalhydraulic Network Analysis). It is possible to determine the integrity of SGs by identifying the main safety parameters which can be changed by the aging degradation of CANDU SGs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Korea Society of Systems EngineeringSame topicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studiesFrench-language works237,207