MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381609993 · doi:10.3389/fenrg.2023.1132611

An overview of thorium as a prospective natural resource for future energy

2023· article· en· W4381609993 on OpenAlexafffund
Rajesh Kumar Jyothi, Leonardo Gadêlha Tumajan Costa de Melo, Rafael M. Santos, Ho-Sung Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Energy Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaKorea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral ResourcesMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsThoriumThorium fuel cycleNuclear technologyNuclear fuelRadioactive wasteUraniumSpent nuclear fuelEnvironmental scienceWaste managementNuclear reactorNuclear powerNuclear engineeringEngineeringPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thorium is a naturally occurring radioactive element that has been identified as a potential alternative fuel for nuclear energy production. Additionally, thorium-based nuclear reactors have inherent safety features that reduce the risk of nuclear accidents and proliferation. As a result, there has been growing interest in the development of thorium-based nuclear energy as a viable alternative to fossil fuels. This paper looks at the present status of thorium nuclear fuel technology, providing an overview of thorium as a prospective natural resource for future energy, the global availability of mineral supplies, and discusses the technical, economic, and environmental factors that may influence its implementation. Potential advantages and challenges critical to further development associated with thorium-based nuclear energy are highlighted as well, and an outlook on its future prospects is provided. Thorium offers advantageous physical and chemical properties over uranium, has a higher energy density, and produces less waste, in addition to its greater natural abundance, making it to be considered a “future nuclear fuel”. There are concerns about the cost and scalability of thorium-based nuclear energy, with uncertainty around the cost to develop, build, and operate thorium reactors, as it has not yet been demonstrated in large-scale commercial reactors—although almost all current reactor types have been built and run using thorium—as it is the case with Uranium-based nuclear technology—the dominant form of nuclear energy for over half a century, having received much more investment and attention than thorium-based technology. Thorium has the potential to contribute towards a more sustainable nuclear industry, including lower lifecycle emissions and more efficient resource utilization, but for this, an acceleration of efforts to date is needed to ensure that this becomes an important climate change stabilizing wedge by the mid-21st century.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Energy ResearchSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207