MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092676834 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.87.034613

Determining the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mrow/><mml:mn>239</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math>Np<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math>cross section using the surrogate ratio method

2013· article· lv· W3092676834 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Czeszumska, C. T. Angell, J. T. Burke, N. D. Scielzo, E. B. Norman, R. A. E. Austin, G. Boutoux, R. J. Casperson, Perry Chodash, R. O. Hughes, Caleb Mattoon, V. Méot, J. Munson, L. Phair, J. J. Ressler, O. Roig, Thomas J. Ross, E. Swanberg, B. S. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2013
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
FundersLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryNuclear PhysicsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Nuclear Security AdministrationLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Homeland SecurityU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSection (typography)FissionCross section (physics)PhysicsNeutronNuclear physicsAtomic physicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryComputer scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Neutron-induced fission cross-section data are needed in various fields of applied and basic nuclear science. However, cross sections of short-lived nuclei are difficult to measure directly due to experimental constraints.Purpose: The first experimental determination of the neutron-induced fission cross section of ${}^{239}$Np at nonthermal energies was performed. This minor actinide is the waiting point to ${}^{240}$Pu production in a nuclear reactor.Method: The surrogate ratio method was employed to indirectly deduce the ${}^{239}\text{Np}(n,f)$ cross section. The surrogate reactions used were ${}^{236}\text{U}{(}^{3}\text{He},p)$ and ${}^{238}\text{U}{(}^{3}\text{He},p)$ with the reference cross section given by the well-known ${}^{237}\text{Np}(n,f)$ cross section. The ratio of observed fission reactions resulting from the two formed compound nuclei, ${}^{238}$Np and ${}^{240}$Np, was multiplied by the directly measured ${}^{237}\text{Np}(n,f)$ cross section to determine the ${}^{239}\text{Np}(n,f)$ cross section.Results: The ${}^{239}\text{Np}(n,f)$ cross section was determined with an uncertainty ranging between 4$%$ and 30$%$ over the energy range of 0.5--20 MeV. The resulting cross section agrees closest with the JENDL-4.0 evaluation.Conclusions: The measured cross section falls in between the existing evaluations, but it does not match any evaluation exactly (with JENDL-4.0 being the closest match); hence reactor codes relying on existing evaluations may under- or overestimate the amount of ${}^{240}$Pu produced during fuel burnup. The measurement helps constrain nuclear structure parameters used in the evaluations.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207