Advanced numerical simulation and modeling for reactor safety – contributions from the CORTEX, McSAFER, and METIS projects
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
This paper gives an account of three projects funded by the European Union that heavily rely on numerical modeling and simulations of nuclear reactors: the CORTEX project (CORe monitoring Techniques and EXperimental validation and demonstration), the McSAFER project (High-Performance Advanced Methods and Experimental Investigations for the Safety Evaluation of Generic Small Modular Reactors), and the METIS project (MEthods and Tools Innovations for Seismic risk assessment). The CORTEX project focuses on neutronic simulations, the McSAFER project considers neutronic, thermal-hydraulic, and thermo-mechanic simulations, whereas the METIS project investigates simulations for seismic assessments. Although the projects have different objectives, they present some common features in terms of the complementary modeling approaches used in each project and in terms of verification and validation programs. The main achievements of the projects are presented in the paper covering the technical aspects of the respective projects, training, education, and dissemination activities, as well as utilization and cross-fertilization. All three projects lead to the advancement in nuclear reactor modeling in the above areas, with the development of new simulation capabilities beyond the state-of-the-art.
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 | 0.001 | 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