MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755797661 · doi:10.12943/cnr.2017.00009

ON THE USE OF A CENTRAL THORIUM FUEL ELEMENT IN PRESSURE-TUBE HEAVY-WATER REACTOR FUEL BUNDLES

2017· article· en· W2755797661 on OpenAlex
Michael McDonald, Megan Moore, Dan Wojtaszek, Nicholas Chornoboy, G. Edwards

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCNL Nuclear Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnupThoriumThorium fuel cycleNuclear engineeringBundleCoolantUraniumNuclear fuelMOX fuelFuel element failureEnvironmental scienceSpent nuclear fuelPressurized water reactorEnriched uraniumWaste managementMaterials scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An incremental approach to introducing thorium to the conventional pressure-tube heavy-water reactor natural uranium fuel cycle is investigated. The approach involves the replacement of the centre fuel element of the bundle with an element of thorium dioxide. Increasing the operating margin of a key safety parameter, the coolant void reactivity, is a prime motivating factor. The analyses showed that the simple use of a single pin of thorium is unlikely to be economically advantageous due to a large burnup penalty and increased fuel costs. However, a slight reduction in the void reactivity is observed, and this approach does allow the exploitation of the energy potential available in thorium as an alternative nuclear fuel resource through the development of a U-233 resource. This bundle concept may also be advantageous from a fuel disposal point of view, as the fuel requires less time in storage before emplacement in a deep geological repository.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.195 · 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