MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2581166267

CANADIAN SUPERCRITICAL WATER-COOLED REACTOR CORE CONCEPT AND SAFETY FEATURES

2016· article· en· W2581166267 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
MetinYetisir, MichelGaudet, JeremyPencer, MichaelMcDonald, DavidRhodes, HollyHamilton, LaurenceLeung

Bibliographic record

VenueCNL Nuclear Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSubcritical and Supercritical Water Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercritical fluidCoolantNuclear engineeringElectricity generationEngineeringProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceWaste managementMechanical engineeringPower (physics)ChemistryThermodynamics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has developed a supercritical water-cooled reactor (SCWR) concept, referred to as Canadian SCWR, with the intention of meeting the technology goals established by the Generation IV International Forum. These goals include enhanced safety features (inherent safe operation and incorporation of passive safety features), improved resource utilization, a sustainable fuel cycle, and greater proliferation resistance than the present Generation II and Generation III reactors. As with other SCWR concepts, the Canadian SCWR concept has been developed to be operated at high-temperature and high-pressure conditions that are above the thermodynamic critical point of water. Different from other SCWR concepts, fuel in the Canadian SCWR concept is housed inside fuel channels, instead of inside a reactor pressure vessel, separating the coolant from the moderator. The coolant is superheated in the core, facilitating the adoption of a direct steam power cycle, which eliminates the need for steam separators and recirc...

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)0.000
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 score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.216
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 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNL Nuclear ReviewSame topicSubcritical and Supercritical Water ProcessesFrench-language works237,207