MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400266752 · doi:10.1080/00295450.2024.2361190

Discrete Element Method Simulation of the Idaho Calcine Simulant for Hot Isostatic Pressing Canister Filling Process: Part 2

2024· article· en· W4400266752 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Chung, Martin Stewart, Peter W Wypych, David B Hastie, Andrew Grima, S. Moricca

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPowder Metallurgy Techniques and Materials
Canadian institutionsGRi Simulations (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHot isostatic pressingMaterials sciencePressingMetallurgyProcess (computing)Nuclear engineeringEnvironmental scienceComposite materialEngineeringComputer scienceSintering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a novel approach to the bulk material handling of simulated radioactive material, focusing on the challenging Idaho calcine waste. Due to the limited availability of the simulant, virtual dynamic simulations were utilized to develop technology demonstration−scale models to assess the efficacy of the discrete element method (DEM) for process development studies. The DEM model was validated using historical experimental data, demonstrating its feasibility with affordable hardware. Acknowledging the limitations of computational analysis, the presented contact model is deemed adequate for preliminary engineering studies. This research advances bulk material handling and provides valuable insights for nuclear waste treatment processes, offering a pioneering framework for researchers working with the Idaho calcine simulant.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear TechnologySame topicPowder Metallurgy Techniques and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207