MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493540487 · doi:10.13182/fst02-a22761

Demonstration of Very High Detritiation Factors with a Pilot-Scale CECE Facility

2002· article· en· W2493540487 on OpenAlexaff
William R.C. Graham, A. E. Everatt, J.R.R. Tremblay, J. M. Miller, D. A. Spagnolo

Bibliographic record

VenueFusion Science & Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear engineeringScale (ratio)Nuclear physicsEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceRadiochemistryPhysicsChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of process data from initial detritiation tests in a pilot-scale Combined Electrolysis and Catalytic Exchange (CECE) Facility1 indicated that very high detritiation factors (DFs), at least 10 000, could be achieved in the facility. Performance requirements for process equipment were evaluated and some minor refinements were made to selected components. In particular, the recombination efficiency of tritium in the electrolytic oxygen stream was improved and the tritiated-water feed point was moved to a location lower in the catalyst column. With these modifications, the facility was able to remove more than 99.998% of the tritium (i.e., achieve a DF greater than 50 000) from a heavy water feed stream containing 330 GBq/kg, with 7.8 TBq/kg in the electrolysis cell. The processing rate at these conditions was about 2.2 Mg/a, compared with a rate of 5 Mg/a for a DF of 180.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations31
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFusion Science & TechnologySame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207