MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013971874 · doi:10.1080/15361055.2019.1705750

Tritium Research and Development Status at KAERI

2020· article· en· W3013971874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jisoo Kim, S. Park, Hyun Suk Kang, Kiwook Jung, K. Y. Kim, Sung Paal Yim, S. B. Kim, H. J. Ahn, C. W. Park, S. N. Lee, Min Ho Chang, Hongsuk Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueFusion Science & Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTritiumNuclear engineeringEnvironmental scienceCoolantFusion powerHeavy waterDeuteriumNeutron generatorRadiochemistryNuclear physicsNeutronMaterials scienceNeutron sourceChemistryPhysicsEngineeringPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Korea has 26 nuclear power plants (NPPs). Out of these 26 plants, 4 are Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors at the Wolsong nuclear power site. In CANDU reactors, deuterium oxide is used as a moderator/coolant, and tritium is produced whenever a deuterium oxide nucleus captures a neutron. The Wolsong Tritium Removal Facility was designed to remove tritium generated in CANDU reactors. We are introducing tritium environmental protection not only at the Wolsong NPP but also at the High-Flux Advanced Neutron Application Reactor (HANARO) and in high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs). We present a tritium behavior analysis code and assess the concentration of tritium in combustible dry active waste. Advanced techniques are introduced to transfer tritium from tritiated water to the gaseous phase. In addition, research on the nuclear fusion tritium storage and delivery system, which is part of the fuel cycle, has been carried out. In this paper, we present the recent progress in the effort to develop tritium systems at the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFusion Science & TechnologySame topicRadioactive contamination and transferFrench-language works237,207