MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557303112 · doi:10.1115/pvp2016-63162

FeCrAl Alloys for Accident Tolerant Fuel Cladding in Light Water Reactors

2016· article· en· W2557303112 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Raúl B. Rebak, Kurt A. Terrani, Russ M. Fawcett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Foundation for Dietetic Research
KeywordsCladding (metalworking)Light-water reactorNuclear engineeringOak Ridge National LaboratoryNuclear fuelPelletsFuel element failureUranium dioxideWater coolingUraniumMaterials scienceSpent nuclear fuelEngineeringMechanical engineeringMetallurgyComposite materialNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Accident Tolerant Fuel Program (ATF) for light water reactors (LWR) is to identify alternative fuel system technologies to further enhance the safety of commercial nuclear power plants. An ATF fuel system would endure loss of cooling in the reactor for a considerably longer period of time than the current systems. The General Electric (GE) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) ATF design concept utilizes an iron-chromium-aluminum (FeCrAl) alloy material as fuel rod cladding in combination with uranium dioxide (UO2) fuel pellets currently in use, resulting in a fuel assembly that leverages the performance of existing/current LWR fuel assembly designs and infrastructure with improved accident tolerance. Significant testing was performed in the last three years to characterize FeCrAl alloys for cladding applications, both under normal operation conditions of the reactor and under accident conditions. This article is a state of the art description of the concept.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207