MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972813637 · doi:10.1115/1.4044531

Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling of Fire and Human Evacuation for Nuclear Applications

2019· article· en· W2972813637 on OpenAlexaffabout
Libo Sun, K. Podila, Q. Chen, A. M. Bayomy, Y.F. Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsComputer scienceLarge eddy simulationHigh fidelityFidelityFire Dynamics SimulatorEnvironmental scienceSimulationNuclear engineeringMarine engineeringAerospace engineeringEngineeringMeteorologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nuclear industry has seen an increased use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) technology as a high-fidelity tool for design-basis and beyond-design-basis accident simulations. Among its applications, CFD modeling of fire and smoke propagation in confined zones (e.g., a main control room (MCR)) is a promising approach, since detailed experimental investigation under various accident scenarios would be difficult. Egress analysis considering human behaviors is of significant importance to an effective accident mitigation strategy, and high-fidelity analysis tools now encompass these parameters in the simulation and design of emergency evacuations. In this study, the fire and smoke propagation in a MCR is modeled using the large eddy simulations (LES) code fire dynamics simulator (FDS), along with an evacuation module, EVAC to simulate the emergency egress under an electrical cabinet fire scenario. The FDS results presented in this paper constitute the first step at Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) in advancing the CFD modeling of fire and evacuation for nuclear applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207