MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410286473 · doi:10.1080/00295639.2025.2475621

Advanced Modeling of the Core of a Prismatic Block Gas-Cooled Reactor

2025· article· en· W4410286473 on OpenAlexafffundabout
K. Podila, Q. Chen, P Pfeiffer, Xianmin Huang, S. Golesorkhi, Alexandre Trottier, Andrew John, S. Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsNuclear engineeringCore (optical fiber)Nuclear reactor coreBlock (permutation group theory)Materials scienceCore modelEngineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pursuant to Canada’s small modular reactor (SMR) action plan to achieve net-zero emissions, a SMR based on gas-cooled reactors (GCRs) is one of the potential concepts among the non-water-cooled reactor technologies to be considered for deployment in the near future in Canada. A coupled modeling approach to account for feedback effects using higher-fidelity solutions is becoming increasingly viable due to improvements in phenomenological models and advanced computing. This study aims to improve simulation accuracy for the prismatic block GCR scenarios of interest using an integrated coupled modeling toolset that loosely couples computational fluid dynamics (CFD), system thermalhydraulics (TH), and neutronics codes.The differentiating aspect of this study is the execution of three-way coupled analyses for the GCRs that can account for both the component- and system-level scales. Within this study, a part of the reactor core was simulated using CFD, coupled with a one-dimensional system TH code for the solution of the rest of the reactor circuit. The power feedback effects inside the reactor core simulated with CFD were obtained from a neutronics solver. An explicit representation of the core components was undertaken in the CFD model to facilitate the detailed modeling of the coolant flow within the channels and its interaction with the reflectors, fuel, and control rods.Two industrially relevant test operating scenarios, fully withdrawn and incremental increase of insertion level of control rods, were simulated to showcase the suitability of the coupled analyses. The reactivity coefficients and control rod worth using the coupled multiphysics analyses are presented. The results demonstrate the capability of the developed algorithm for coupling three modeling disciplines for its application in GCR core simulations.

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)0.001
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear Science and EngineeringSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207