Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clean energy technologies appear to be in the spotlight of recent discussions of policy and opinion makers all around the world. Although these discussions do not always appear very technical, they do provide opportunities to show the way toward scientific and technically sound solutions benefiting all people on the planet. These opportunities are definitely extended toward ASME (which promotes the art, science, and practice of multidisciplinary engineering and allied sciences around the globe) in general and the ASME Nuclear Engineering Division (NED, which focuses on the design, analysis, development, testing, operation and maintenance of reactor systems and components, nuclear fusion, heat transport, nuclear fuels technology, and radioactive waste) in particular. Yes, nuclear energy is a clean energy. Probably, the most abundant of all that is available to humanity today.Research, development, design, commissioning, operation, decommissioning of clean energy technologies including nuclear fission and fusion, and last, but not least, sharing information and experience with peers, are traditionally among the core activities of the members of ASME and its Nuclear Engineering Division. We only need to tackle a few more challenges to seize the opportunities given by the clean energy technologies debate. The main one is offering our advice and expertise to support the policy and opinion makers in their quest for technically sound solutions.The NED already has many appropriate tools for sharing information and experience. The flagship among them is the Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science. After a full four years of steady growth, it is now an established platform for sharing scientific and technical information. This has been made possible through the excellent leadership of the Editor in Chief Prof Igor L. Pioro, the distinguished associate and guest editors, many reviewers, and last but certainly not least, the authors of many high quality contributed papers. We are now very confidently looking forward to the fifth year of growth.Based on the turnout and the comments received from many of the nearly 900 registered participants, the 26th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering (ICONE 26), held in London, UK, between July 22 and 28, 2018, was a great success. In total, 57% of the participants were from academia, 29% from the industry, and 11% from government. Geographically, the largest part of participants came from China (45%), European Union (20%, including 7% from UK), Japan (16%), USA and Canada (11%), and South Korea (6%). These statistics show emphatically that ICONE presents a truly worldwide view on Nuclear Power, and there is no better venue to express viewpoints or share information with likeminded professionals.The preparations for ICONE 27 are now at the peak. It will be held in Tsukuba, Japan, between May 19 and 24, 2019. Jointly organized by ASME, JSME (Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers), and CNS (Chinese Nuclear Society), it will offer many in-depth technical sessions, the very well-attended student program with 60 student finalists from all continents being invited to the conference, high level plenary sessions, and many panel sessions discussing the latest achievements in technical terms and in the outreach to the public and decision makers. The preparations for ICONE28, scheduled for Aug. 2–6, 2020, and collocated with ASME Power conference in Anaheim, Ca., will start soon.Many NED sponsored activities aim at exchange and cooperation with communities beyond Nuclear Engineering. The 2020 International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management (ICEM; in cooperation with the ASME Environmental Engineering Division), is scheduled for Oct. 4–8, 2020, in Hamburg, Germany. Nuclear Forum has already become a traditional event within the annual International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (IMECE). Further initiative, which is gaining traction and support of many ASME divisions, is Advance Clean Energy Summit (ACES), which will reach out to communities beyond Nuclear engineering. The first event is planned in the second half of 2019.The NED is also working on the opportunities to exchange views with the government decision makers. A Congressional Briefing is scheduled for March 2019.I am very grateful to all the NED members, especially the members and past chairs of the Executive Committee, for their brave visions, wisdom, hard work, and loyalty, which all enabled us to be well prepared for the opportunities and challenges confronting us today. Let me also use this opportunity to invite all of you, who would like to contribute more to the activities of NED and through this to contribute also to the success of the nuclear energy among the clean energy technologies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".