MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039624139 · doi:10.1002/maco.202011784

Probabilistic model for pitting of copper canisters

2020· article· en· W3039624139 on OpenAlexaff
Scott Briggs, Christina Lilja, Fraser King

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials and Corrosion · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsNuclear Waste Management Organization
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPitting corrosionCorrosionCopperBentoniteProbabilistic logicEnvironmental scienceErosion corrosion of copper water tubesSaturation (graph theory)Monte Carlo methodMaterials scienceMetallurgyGeotechnical engineeringMathematicsGeologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Copper canisters for the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel are expected to be subject to general (uniform) corrosion and a limited degree of localised damage. Although the canister is expected to be exposed to predominantly active conditions, it is nevertheless prudent to assess the probability of pitting corrosion in passive conditions. A probabilistic pitting model is developed for aerobic conditions in water‐saturated bentonite. While aerobic, saturated conditions may be unlikely to occur if saturation is slow or O2 consumption is fast, these conditions have been assumed as a starting point because of the availability of data. The model samples from environmental conditions use a Monte Carlo approach to predict active or passive conditions. Under passive conditions, the model compares corrosion potentials to breakdown and repassivation potentials to determine pit initiations and deaths, respectively. Pit depth distributions can then be calculated. For the assumed conditions, the model predicts that active conditions dominate 90% of the time while the remaining passive conditions can lead to pitting during the first few years primarily controlled by the availability of oxygen.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials and CorrosionSame topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207