MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229996589 · doi:10.2172/1648116

10.2172/1648116

2000· article· en· W4229996589 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In late 2019, INL and ANL agreed to jointly develop the reactor physics code named Griffin based on the integration of the two code suites, MAMMOTH/Rattlesnake (INL) and MC2-3/PROTEUS (ANL). Griffin is being developed based on the MOOSE framework and MOOSE quality assurance procedures. This decision was made to be able to allow DOE-NE to efficiently invest funding to this area and to provide effective and timely support for existing and potential users; the latter includes industry and government organizations who are developing various types of advanced reactors in the near and long term. Since MAMMOTH/Rattlesnake has been developed based on the MOOSE framework, the INL/ANL Griffin development team agreed to build Griffin beginning with a merger of MAMMOTH and Rattlesnake into a single code and moving forward by implementing capabilities from the PROTEUS suite into Griffin. Moving forward, both ANL and INL efforts are equally invested in the Griffin project, with management support, to provide an advanced reactor multiphysics tool to assist in reactor design, optimization, and safety analysis. Much work remains in moving Griffin forward to migrate PROTEUS capabilities and to optimize performance to meet user needs. The main objective of this work is to assess the current status of Griffin capabilities in terms of performance and accuracy, to determine priorities for PROTEUS migration, and to identify capabilities and features to improve for supporting the code integration effort. For this assessment, the Empire micro reactor problem that was developed in the ARPA-E MEITNER program was selected as an advance reactor concept of interest to the technical community. The Empire reactor problem was expanded from its original incomplete specification to be a small heat-pipe-cooled micro reactor core with ~113 cm radius and 70 cm in height, composed of 18 fuel assemblies, 12 control drums, and beryllium radial and axial reflectors. In the current model, using 5 cm axial reflectors specified in the original Empire assembly model, more than 10% of neutrons leak axially and through the empty center safety hole, as well as through heat pipe channels in fuel assembly elements that extend through the top reflector region. Several calculation models of the core were defined for systematic assessment, including 2-D and 3-D fuel assemblies and whole cores with cylindrical boundaries. Cross sections were generated using Serpent 2, and meshes were produced using the Argonne mesh tool or the INL neutronics meshing tools combined with CUBIT. Cross sections and meshes were converted to the ISOXML and Exodus formats, respectively, so that Griffin and PROTEUS could use consistent data for solving the reactor problems. With the prepared cross sections and meshes, PROTEUS was run first to ensure that all input data were correctly generated and input options in terms of angle, mesh, and energy group were accurately determined. Comparisons against Serpent 2 solutions were made in terms of eigenvalue and pin power. The same calculations and comparisons were then conducted using Griffin. For the fuel assembly and whole core problems, the PROTEUS eigenvalues agreed well with reference Serpent 2 solutions within 100 and 30 pcm, respectively, and pin power differences relative to Serpent 2 were overall less than 2.2% and RMS 0.8% for the whole core models. This indicated that all input data were properly prepared. Using the same data, Griffin was run selecting the SAAF-CFEM SN solver with Legendre-Gaussian quadrature and NDA and DSA for acceleration. It was found that the SAAF-CFEM solver of Griffin required finer meshes to achieve eigenvalue and pin power solutions in good agreement with Serpent 2, consequently requiring more memory requirement and longer computation time. On the other hand, the SPH-Diffusion 2-D core calculations performed using Griffin were able to recover the exact eigenvalue from the reference Serpent 2 solutions, resulting

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9730.981

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.125
Teacher spread0.123 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207