MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045338390 · doi:10.1115/1.4047927

Current Status of Reactors Deployment and Small Modular Reactors Development in the World

2020· article· en· W3045338390 on OpenAlexaff
Igor Pioro, Romney B. Duffey, P. L. Kirillov, Nikita Dort-Goltz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear powerModular designRenewable energyElectricity generationEnvironmental scienceSoftware deploymentEnergy developmentElectricityWind powerNuclear engineeringNuclear reactorEnvironmental economicsEngineeringPower (physics)Computer scienceElectrical engineeringPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to emerging climate change concerns coupled with increased global energy demand, eventually the world needs to move to low-carbon-emission electricity-generating sources—nonrenewables, such as nuclear power, and renewables, as hydro, wind, geothermal, solar, and tidal. The only source is nuclear power that is reliable, concentrated, and can be of large installed capacity and operate with high capacity factors. This paper updates and presents the current status of nuclear-power deployment and small modular reactors (SMRs) development in the world. Unfortunately, within last 9 years, electricity generation with nuclear power has decreased from ∼14% before the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) severe accident in March of 2011 to about ∼10%. Therefore, it is important to follow up with and understand the latest trends in nuclear power including SMRs development.

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)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studiesFrench-language works237,207