MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329211814 · doi:10.12943/anr.2014.00025

A PRELIMINARY CATHENA THERMALHYDRAULIC MODEL OF THE CANADIAN SCWR FOR SAFETY ANALYSIS

2014· article· en· W2329211814 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
D.F. Wang, S. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueAECL Nuclear Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat transfer and supercritical fluids
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlenum spaceSupercritical fluidNuclear engineeringIdealizationConceptual designHeat exchangerEngineeringMechanical engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer sciencePhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The supercritical water-cooled reactor (SCWR) is one of six reactor concepts under development in the Generation-IV International Forum (GIF). As a member of GIF, Canada is developing a pressure-tube type SCWR, which has the potential to fulfill all major GIF goals on enhanced safety, sustainability, economics, and proliferation resistance. The system thermalhydraulics code CATHENA will be used in the safety analyses for the Canadian SCWR. Based on the current conceptual design of the Canadian SCWR, a CATHENA idealization has been developed. This model includes all 336 fuel channels with a detailed model of heat transfer in the reactor core. Also modeled are the main pumps, inlet plenum, outlet plenum, turbines, and heavy water moderator. In this paper, the CATHENA idealization of the Canadian SCWR conceptual design is described. Simulation results for steady-state normal operations are also presented for the current Canadian SCWR conceptual design.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAECL Nuclear ReviewSame topicHeat transfer and supercritical fluidsFrench-language works237,207