MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009177936 · doi:10.1115/1.4046824

A Novel Assessment of Delayed Neutron Detector Data in CANDU Reactors

2020· article· en· W3009177936 on OpenAlexaffabout
William Aylward, Christopher Wallace, Graeme West, Curtis McEwan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBruce Power (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Computer scienceSmoothingProcess (computing)Anomaly detectionSpent nuclear fuelReliability engineeringData miningRisk analysis (engineering)Nuclear engineeringEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A common opportunity for nuclear power plant operators is ensuring that routinely collected data are fully leveraged. Exploiting data analytics can enable improvements in anomaly detection and condition monitoring by identifying previously unseen data trends and correlations without major financial investment. One such opportunity is in facilitating the detection of fuel defects by augmenting the delayed neutron (DN) monitoring system deployed in the majority of Canada deuterium uranium (CANDU) reactors. In this paper, we demonstrate using archive data that the detection of fuel defects can be accelerated using this system in combination with the use of a deeper historical dataset and the introduction of a smoothing algorithm. The current defect identification process relies on the analysis of data of high variance and is subject to the judgment of a domain expert, resulting in variable defect identification periods. The proposed approaches seek to mitigate this and alleviate the variable identification time. Initial results presented here show that for an initial batch of 30 defects, identification periods can be meaningfully reduced compared to the current process, with defects potentially visible on an average of 11.4 days earlier. By shortening this identification period, fuel containing defects can be scheduled for earlier removal, reducing the risk of statutory shutdown obligations, protecting personnel, and promoting industry best practice. Exploring a historical dataset identifies previously undocumented trends and we discuss the potential to produce correlations with other reactor parameters. The application of this knowledge can lead to opportunities in the use of machine learning algorithms and, ultimately, more accurate predictions.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207