MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784843795 · doi:10.1080/00295450.2017.1415087

Measurement and Analysis for Determination of PCR of the CANDU6 Core

2018· article· en· W2784843795 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jaeha Kim, Mohammad Motalab, Yonghee Kim, Gwangsoo Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNuclear Safety and Security Commission
KeywordsNuclear engineeringReactivity (psychology)Transient (computer programming)Environmental scienceComputer scienceReliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The power coefficient of reactivity (PCR) needs to be negative to achieve the inherent safety of a reactor. However, the possibility that the PCR of CANada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors can be positive has been raised in recent studies. In such circumstances, there was an experimental approach on evaluating the PCR of CANDU in 2012 at an in-operation CANDU reactor, Wolsong Unit 2. In the evaluation, the PCR was indirectly measured by a method that required estimating the reactivity variation due to Xe, liquid zone controllers (LZCs), and fuel depletion based on the measurement data. In this study, the PCR of a CANDU was reevaluated by the same methodology with more proper and detailed methods to estimate all the factors in addition to some minor reactivity corrections. The estimation of Xe and LZC reactivity was performed by an in-house three-dimensional code and Serpent2 in addition to RFSP-IST. Furthermore, several short studies regarding the factors that result in uncertainty of the Xe/LZC reactivity estimation were done in detail. First, a method to determine 14 LZC levels at a certain time based on the measurement data was appropriately selected through determining the features of the measurement data. The influence of the power transient scheme and the impact of local refueling transients due to daily refueling of CANDU reactors on xenon reactivity estimation were also analyzed briefly. Finally, the PCR of the CANDU in operational conditions was evaluated to be ~0.5 pcm/%P on average at a measurement time of 5 to 20 min after the power perturbation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0050.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear TechnologySame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207