Simulating Properties of Canadian Research Reactor Fuels Important to Disposal
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
Canada has operated 17 research reactors at 11 different locations. The spent fuel from these research reactors differs significantly from CANDU fuel, which makes up the vast majority of spent fuel in Canada, and will eventually require disposal. The focus of this paper is to identify properties specific to Canadian research reactor fuel designs that would impact their suitability for disposal. The radionuclide inventory, hazardous chemical inventory, decay heat, residual enrichment, radiation decay rates, and gas generation of several Canadian research reactor fuel designs were simulated using the SCALE 6.2.4 software suite. The National Research Universal U3Si/Al dispersion rod, the National Research Experimental uranium metal X-rod, the Royal Military College UO2 SLOWPOKE-2 core, and the Whiteshell Reactor 1 uranium carbide bundle were investigated. Fuel burnup is the primary driver for the concentration of most radionuclides, hazardous chemicals, decay heat, and radiation decay rates. Carbon-14, chlorine-36, and mercury are driven by initial impurities in the fuel, which vary by fuel design. Low burnup, enriched fuels constitute a reasonable bounding case for the evaluation of criticality safety and proliferation risks. Canadian research reactor fuels are unlikely to present a greater risk of over pressurization from helium generation than CANDU fuel. Overall, the small volume of Canadian research reactor fuels requiring disposal is an important factor in the evaluation of disposal requirements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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