Capability Enhancements for System-level thermal Hydraulic Modeling of Lead Fast Reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project has focused on the use, assessment, and development of the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 (SAS) safety analysis software. Although SAS was originally intended as a safety analysis tool for Liquid Metal cooled Fast Reactors (LMFRs), which includes both Sodium Fast Reactors (SFRs) and Lead Fast Reactors (LFRs), the vast majority of its recent development and customization has been tailored to SFRs. In general, enhancements that are made to the software for SFRs are applicable to LFRs, however, the fuel composition and corrosive nature of lead requires careful consideration when performing safety analysis of an LFR. In this project an emphasis was placed on closing gaps that are associated with modeling LFRs using SAS. The principal objective of the project was to enhance the ability of SAS as a licensing tool for LFRs. This objective was to be accomplished through three tasks: 1) Enhance the ability of SAS to couple with external software; 2) Improve the underlying physics models in SAS, with priority given to models that are highly relevant to LFRs; 3) Extend the Verification and Validation (V&V) basis of the software
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".