Comparison between RELAP/SCDAPSIM/MOD3.4 and MOD3.6+ in Simulating a CANDU6 SBO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Romania, as a country that currently operates two CANDU 6 (CANada Deuterium Uranium reactor) units, has extensively investigated the severe accident progression, including studies on the severe accident management measures to be accounted in order to limit the core damage. Most analyses of CANDU 6 SA were performed using RELAP / SCDAPSIM / MOD3.4 a thermalhydraulic and nuclear safety analysis code which was initially designed for Light Water Reactors. A new version of the code has been developed, MOD3.6+, which includes mechanistic models specific to CANDU reactors core degradation under severe accident conditions. In this paper we introduce the best-estimate analysis results from the SA accident analysis for a CANDU 6 reactor using MOD3.6+ with the mechanistic models for fuel channel failure and core disassembly in comparison with the previous results from conservative analyses using conservative assumptions for the phenomena during a Station BlackOut accident.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".