MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386837246 · doi:10.3390/plasma6030041

Study of Atmospheric Plasma-Based Mass Separation System for High-Level Radioactive Waste Treatment

2023· article· en· W4386837246 on OpenAlexaff
Sharif Abu Darda, Hossam A. Gabbar

Bibliographic record

VenuePlasma · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiphysicsRadioactive wasteAtmospheric pressureFission productsNuclear engineeringSpent nuclear fuelPlasmaChemistryMaterials scienceWaste managementNuclear physicsPhysicsNuclear chemistryEngineeringThermodynamicsMeteorologyFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solid spent nuclear fuel from nuclear power plants contains 3.4% fission products (80–160 amu), contributing to a radioactivity level of over 99.8%. On the other hand, liquid high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) from spent fuel reprocessing is composed of 98.9% bulk elements (0–60 amu) with 0.1% radioactivity. A separation mechanism for the mass categories into groups presents unique opportunities for managing HLRW in the long term with a considerable cost reduction. This paper proposes a thermal plasma-based separation system incorporating atmospheric-pressure plasma torches for HLRW mass separation into low-resolution mass groups. Several engineering issues must be addressed, such as waste preparation, waste injection into the plasma, and waste collecting after mass separation. Using the COMSOL Multiphysics simulation, the generic system can be studied using noble gas mass separation, and the mass filter capabilities can be further analyzed. This paper provides the history of plasma-based mass separation. The functional modelling of a thermal plasma mass separation system is proposed under atmospheric pressure. Finally, aspects of mass separation simulation using the noble gases argon and helium inside the plasma mass separation system are studied via COMSOL Multiphysics.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlasmaSame topicPlasma Diagnostics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207