A Literature Review and Compilation of Nuclear Waste Management System Attributes for Use in Multi-Objective System Evaluations.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this work was to compile a comprehensive initial set of potential nuclear waste management system attributes. This initial set of attributes is intended to serve as a starting point for additional consideration by system analysts and planners to facilitate the development of a waste management system multi-objective evaluation framework based on the principles and methodology of multi-attribute utility analysis. The compilation is primarily based on a review of reports issued by the Canadian Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) and the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC), but also an extensive review of the available literature for similar and past efforts as well. Numerous system attributes found in different sources were combined into a single objectives-oriented hierarchical structure. This study provides a discussion of the data sources and the descriptions of the hierarchical structure. A particular focus of this study was on collecting and compiling inputs from past studies that involved the participation of various external stakeholders. However, while the important role of stakeholder input in a country's waste management decision process is recognized in the referenced sources, there are only a limited number of in-depth studies of the stakeholders' differing perspectives. Compiling a comprehensive hierarchical listing of attributes is a complex task since stakeholders have multiple and often conflicting interests. The BRC worked for two years (January 2010 to January 2012) to "ensure it has heard from as many points of view as possible." The Canadian NWMO study took four years and ample resources, involving national and regional stakeholders' dialogs, internet-based dialogs, information and discussion sessions, open houses, workshops, round tables, public attitude research, website, and topic reports. The current compilation effort benefited from the distillation of these many varied inputs conducted by the previous studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".