MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409637926 · doi:10.32370/ia_2025_01_4

Challenges of Radioactive Waste Management and Spent Nuclear Fuel Handling in the Context of Nuclear Energy Development

2025· article· en· W4409637926 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadioactive wasteSpent nuclear fuelContext (archaeology)High-level wasteNuclear fuelWaste managementNuclear engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article examines modern approaches to managing radioactive waste (RW) and spent nuclear fuel (SNF) amid the growing demand for nuclear energy. It focuses on the classification of RW, existing methods of processing and disposal, and analyzes international experience in this field. The discussion includes environmental and social aspects of handling RW and SNF, emphasizing the need for innovative technologies and strengthened international cooperation to ensure the safe and sustainable development of nuclear energy.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicNuclear and radioactivity studiesFrench-language works237,207