MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112399540 · doi:10.32918/nrs.2020.4(88).01

Approach to Regulatory Pre-Licensing SMR Vendor Design Review

2020· article· en· W3112399540 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
O. Zhabin, O. Pecherytsia, Sergey Tarakanov, I. Shevchenko

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear and Radiation Safety · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVendorRisk analysis (engineering)Process (computing)Engineering managementBest practiceBusinessEngineeringComputer scienceProcess managementPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has recently completed the first phase of the pre-licensing vendor design review (VDR) for the SMR-160 small modular reactor (SMR) designed by Holtec International (USA). This event is an example of early involvement of the regulatory authority into review of the safety assessment for SMR design developed in compliance with standards and rules of another country. This example deserves a detailed analysis considering that the introduction of SMR technology is potentially attractive for Ukraine and there is national interest in this area. The paper presents an overview of the regulatory framework governing the pre-licensing VDR by CNSC: objective, initial conditions, main stages, technical content and general expected results of this process. According to the first phase of the review performed for the SMR-160 design, information on the main aspects addressed for each technical area and the main review findings are provided. Since the implementation of relevant advanced practices is reasonable and relevant, the paper proposes to consider the development and implementation of regulatory framework for the national nuclear regulatory authority to perform further pre-licensing reviews of designs using the latest foreign technologies.

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)0.156
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.150
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1560.150
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear and Radiation SafetySame topicGraphite, nuclear technology, radiation studiesFrench-language works237,207