NEW REFERENCE APOLLO3® CALCULATION SCHEME FOR LIGHT WATER REACTORS – ANALYSIS OF THE BEAVRS BENCHMARK
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past few years, developments in the APOLLO3® deterministic code have mainly been devoted to Fast Reactor applications. In this paper, we investigate the possibility of using some of these methods to build an accurate two-step calculation scheme for commercial Pressurized Water Reactors, with application to the BEAVRS benchmark at hot zero power conditions of cycle 1. Our objective is to assess the performances of the best “standard” calculation currently possible with APOLLO3® and to have a starting point for the development of improved transport solvers and innovative calculation schemes. At the lattice level, we show that the subgroup method using the REL383 energy mesh, associated with a MOC flux calculation, provides accurate results on different clusters of 3x3 cells with UOX and MOX fuel, including a heterogeneity at the center (guide-tube full of water or with common absorbers Ag-In-Cd or B4C inserted, and mixed uranium-gadolinium oxide fuel). These good results have been confirmed on BEAVRS assembly, rods in and rods out. At the core level, 20-group 3D calculations with the MINARET Sn solver have been performed at the cell level to analyze BEAVRS Hot Zero Power results (reactivity, power map, and control rods worths). Results are rather satisfactory, considering the low computing cost, but the power map prediction needs to be improved.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it