MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410807744 · doi:10.1080/00295639.2025.2494187

Development of a TRACE Critical Break LOCA Model for D-PSA Applications with RAVEN

2025· article· en· W4410807744 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCANDU Owners Group
KeywordsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Nuclear engineeringNuclear physicsComputer sciencePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the nuclear power industry, several design-basis accidents are critical for nuclear power plant design and licensing, with loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs) being particularly significant for ensuring safe shutdown, emergency cooling, and adequate containment systems. In CANada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactors, a large-break LOCA causes an immediate power surge due to rapid voiding and the positive void reactivity coefficient, with break location greatly influencing severity. Inlet piping breaks, for example, can cause flow reversal, higher voiding rates, or flow stagnation. Conservative assumptions like double-ended guillotine breaks ensure bounding analyses, but for certain metrics (e.g. CANDU fuel channel integrity), partial inlet breaks may be more restrictive, necessitating critical break searches. Break size is crucial in determining mass loss, reactivity, heat deposition, and post-LOCA cooling, impacting severity and mitigation strategies. The Dynamic Probabilistic Safety Assessment (D-PSA) CANDU LOCA pilot aims to identify the most sensitive parameters in critical scenarios and demonstrate the value of D-PSA for risk-informed methods. Using stochastic generation of input parameters under uncertainty, D-PSA quantifies effective risk mitigation factors. While best-estimate analyses attempt to quantify uncertainty in figures of merit, they often impose restrictive conditions. This study integrates uncertainty analysis with component and human reliability in the D-PSA framework, applying Monte Carlo sampling of TRACE input parameters through the RAVEN framework to evaluate dynamic parameters’ impact and compare results with existing CANDU LOCA studies.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.295 · 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