MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319588931 · doi:10.1115/imece2022-96808

Evaluation of Fuel Rod Response Using Principal Component Analysis

2022· article· en· W4319588931 on OpenAlexaff
Ibrahim Gad-el-Hak, Njuki Mureithi, Kostas Karazis

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 5: Dynamics, Vibration, and Control · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleMechanicsTransverse planeBundleInstabilityMaterials scienceAmplitudeVibrationJet (fluid)Flow (mathematics)AccelerationPhysicsOpticsStructural engineeringAcousticsClassical mechanicsComposite materialEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study pertains to an experimental analysis on the effects of the transverse jet flow geometry on the stability of a 6 × 6 square rod bundle. The experimental work represents a reduced scale fuel assembly subjected to localized cross flow conditions. This type of complex system is typically found in the nuclear industry (pressurized water reactor cores). The goal of the experimental study is to investigate the onset and characterize rod instability as it relates to the intensity and diameter of the jet cross-flow. The rod response was recorded using a high-speed camera in the vibration plane. From image processing, rod vibration amplitudes, and power spectral densities are acquired in both stream-wise and transverse directions. The results indicate that by increasing the jet nozzle diameter ratio, the critical flow velocity is reduced, however, the maximum vibration amplitude in the bundle decreases as the jet diameter ratio increases. The experimental datasets produced by all three sets of experiments were analyzed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). The method obtained the orbit plots of the rod bundle undergoing fluid-elastic instability due to the transverse jet flow penetration for each set of experiments. A significant outcome of this research is the relation of acceleration ratio when the nozzle diameter is increased.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 5: Dynamics, Vibration, and ControlSame topicNuclear Engineering Thermal-HydraulicsFrench-language works237,207