MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038138275 · doi:10.7731/kifse.c3462cff

Fire Protection Regulations for Ensuring Fire Safety during Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants in Korea

2020· article· en· W3038138275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jung-Wun Kim, Chan-Geun Park

Bibliographic record

VenueFire science and engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear decommissioningNuclear powerShutdownNuclear power plantEngineeringFire protectionForensic engineeringWaste managementCivil engineeringNuclear engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear power plants (NPPs) in Korea are required to be maintained using a defense in-depth approach to prevent leakage of radioactive substances outside the plant and allow safe shutdown in the event of a fire. Periodic testing must be conducted to ensure that the fire protection facilities perform as required by the laws for various nuclear reactor types. In June 2017, for the first time in Korea, a nuclear plant, Kori Unit 1, was permanently shut down. It was prepared for decommissioning in accordance with the fire protection regulations imposed by the regulatory body. However, a standard protocol is necessary for systematically establishing the fire protection program for decommissioning of NPPs in the future. Therefore, the nuclear legal systems of countries with many operating nuclear power plants, such as the United States, Japan, Canada, and various European countries, were reviewed and guidelines for establishing a fire protection program for decommissioning NPPs was suggested; the fire protection requirements stated by Reg Guide 1.191 (Decommissioning fire protection program for NPPs during decommissioning and permanent shutdown) were used as a model. Suggestions for establishing legal regulations to optimize fire protection programs and secure basic technology for decommissioning NPPs were also made.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFire science and engineeringSame topicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studiesFrench-language works237,207