Evaluation of material accountancy techniques for 233Pa from thorium nuclear fuels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thorium is a promising alternative to uranium as nuclear fuel with advantages such as higher abundance, lower production of long-lived transuranic elements, and potentially better proliferation resistance. However, thorium presents a potential pathway for proliferation where produced 233 Pa can be diverted for the clandestine production of safeguarded 233 U. To prevent this, the ability to detect and measure 233 Pa must be assessed. This paper reviews several nuclear material accountancy techniques to determine their suitability for detecting 233 Pa extracted from irradiated thorium fuel. Hybrid K-edge densitometry and passive gamma spectroscopy have been found to be the best options based on technology maturity, cost, accuracy, and acquisition time. Thorium can be used in various reactor designs such as pressurized water reactors (PWRs), Canada deuterium uranium (CANDU) reactors, and molten salt reactors (MSRs). Therefore, thorium-uranium oxide fueling was modeled for three representative reactors (PWR, CANDU, MSR), burning the fuel to 47 GWd/MTHM for PWR, 19 GWd/MTHM for CANDU, and at a steady power of 52.711 MW/MTHM for MSR. Within each model, the protactinium element in the used fuel was extracted and its isotopic content analyzed. Simulated results indicated that 233 Pa can be detected using passive gamma spectroscopy in each fuel type at all decay times (0–300 days) following separation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".