Stochastic Environmental modeling for Nuclear Waste Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep geological repositories are identified as possible disposal site for safely isolating highly radioactive nuclear waste from affecting humans and the environment. These repositories are multi barrier systems and safety of the system is very crucial since failure of the system will lead to radioactive contamination, which is harmful to the environment. \n\tIt is necessary to model the possible failure of the system, one of the most significant parameter is the mass transfer between the barriers in the multiple barrier system given by equivalent flow rates, half time of the solute and the delay time between the inflow and outflow of the barriers. The entire model is constructed based on the conservation assumption of mass flux. The model is used to analyze radioactive decays of the two long lived radioactive species C-14 (neutral non-sorbing nuclide) and I-129 (anionic non-sorbing nuclide). From the radioactive decay of these radionuclides the equivalent exposure is calculated to ensure that it is well below the current safety limits specified by the Regulator. \n\tThe geosphere and bentonite buffer, which are a part of the multi barrier system, are porous media and modeling the seepage is done using Darcy’s law. Modeling seepage of water is important because water acts as a carrier for several elements that can potentially corrode the copper coating. The copper coating is an integral part of the multi barrier system, and an essential element of of the used fuel container. \n This thesis analyzes effects of a wide spectrum of uncertainties on the performance of the analytical solution obtained from the deterministic model is used to (i) consider parameter uncertainties, and (ii) derive stochastic solution of governing equations for the following two cases: (1) water seepage into the DGR, and (2) Mass outflow of radioactive material. Case I a man-made system whose uncertain and time invariant parameters, whereas Case II considers stochastic nature of the natural environment. Conclusions from this study support a high level of safety aspects of DGR for the disposal of high level radioactive waste.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".