Reliability and Safety Assessment of a Passive Containment Cooling System in Advanced Heavy Water Reactors
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
Passive Safety Systems (PSSs), which rely on natural forces and processes, such as natural circulation, gravity, internal stored energy, etc., are increasingly utilized in generation 3+ and generation 4 advanced nuclear power plants to increase inherent safety features of the nuclear reactor design.Although PSSs should considerably increase the safety of nuclear power plants, it is still challenging to systematically assess the reliability of passive systems because of the lack of data and uncertainties associated with phenomenon involving natural forces that underlies their safety functions.In this study, the Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) was used to assess the reliability and safety of the Passive Containment Cooling System (PCCS) in Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR).The failure probability of PCCS was calculated from the failure probabilities of Basic Events (BEs).Using the data for the failure probabilities of Top Event (TE) and BE from the FTA model, two Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models were proposed for the reliability analysis of PCCS to supplement the FTA model.Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU) and Sigmoid activation functions were utilized to build ANN models, and an Adaptive moment estimation (Adam) optimizer was used to train the ANN models to make these models computationally efficient.The results of the FTA model were compared with the predictions of the ANN models to find out the ANN model performance.
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 | 0.000 | 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