MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017213239 · doi:10.1115/1.4046909

A Theory and Model of Molten Salt Reactor Xenon Behavior After the Solubility Limit

2020· article· en· W3017213239 on OpenAlexaff
Terry J. Price, O. Chvála

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXenonSolubilityMolten saltSalt (chemistry)Molten salt reactorMaterials scienceChemistryThermodynamicsNuclear engineeringInorganic chemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to the circulating nature of the fuel, there is a qualitative difference between xenon behavior in a molten salt reactor (MSR) compared to a solid fuel reactor. Therefore, the equations that describe 135Xe behavior in a molten salt reactor must be formulated differently. Prior molten salt reactor xenon models have focused on behavior below a solubility limit in which the 135Xe is partially dissolved in the fuel salt. It is foreseeable that a molten salt reactor may operate with a concentration of gas dissolved in the salt sufficiently high such that no further gas may dissolve in the fuel salt. This paper introduces a theory of molten salt reactor xenon behavior for a reactor operating above the solubility limit. A model was developed based on this theory and analyses performed are discussed. Results indicate: (1) steady-state xenon poisoning is not monotonic with respect to gas egress rate, (2) a increase in gas ingress rate leads to a characteristic increase which is followed by a new steady-state in xenon poisoning, and (3) given a sufficient rate of gas egress, it is possible to remove the iodine pit behavior.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207