MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402130246 · doi:10.1115/1.4066404

TSUNAMI Analyses of the Similarity and Applicability of Zero Energy Deuterium 2 Critical Experiments for Reactor Physics Code Benchmarking for a Pressurized Water Reactor Small Modular Reactor Design Concept

2024· article· en· W4402130246 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Eugene Masala, L. Blomeley, D. G. Watts, Blair P. Bromley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsPressurized water reactorNuclear engineeringNuclear fuelModular designResearch reactorNuclear dataNuclear reactorEnriched uraniumLight-water reactorNuclear physicsNeutronUraniumEnvironmental sciencePhysicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the findings of studies conducted at Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) to support the development of small modular reactor (SMR) designs. The primary focus of this research was to evaluate the suitability of the zero energy deuterium 2 (ZED-2) critical facility in replicating the reactor physics environment for a pressurized water reactor small modular reactor (PWR-SMR) design concept through similarity and nuclear data sensitivity studies, using the TSUNAMI code suite. It was found that previous ZED-2 experiments would be quite promising for application to a PWR-SMR design. Further similarity and sensitivity studies of hypothetical mixed-lattice substitution experiments, where PWR-SMR fuel assemblies were placed into a substitution region of the ZED-2 critical facility demonstrated improved similarity. Subsequent analyses focused on the impacts of dissolved Gadolinium (Gd) and boron (B) neutron absorbers, suggesting the feasibility of using future ZED-2 experiments to more closely replicate PWR-SMR reactor physics behavior. Building on these initial findings, the design for PWR-SMR fuel assembly substitution experiments in the ZED-2 facility were explored further. These hypothetical experiments feature water-cooled PWR-type fuel assemblies inside a shroud, surrounded by heavy-water-moderated CANdu FLEXible, Low Enriched Uranium, Recovered Uranium (CANFLEX-LEU/CANFLEX-RU) fuel channels. Similarity and sensitivity studies indicate a very high level of similarity of these experiments for PWR-SMR design applications.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207