MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412949037 · doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2025.165820

Neutronic simulation of the seventh irradiation experiment at the Swiss spallation neutron source

2025· article· en· W4412949037 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wei Jiang, Wei Lu, Yong Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsSpallationSpallation Neutron SourceNuclear physicsNuclear engineeringNeutron sourceIrradiationNeutron irradiationRadiochemistryNeutronMaterials sciencePhysicsChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SINQ Target Irradiation Program (STIP) is one of the important research projects performed at the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI). The seventh experiment of the SINQ Target Irradiation Program (STIP-VII) was conducted with SINQ Target 10 from 2013 to 2014 and the total proton charge received by the target was 11.7 Ah. A radiation damage assessment was performed using MCNPX to predict the key radiation damage productions of displacement, helium and hydrogen for six materials, 9Cr-1Mo steel, Zry-2, Al, SiC, Ta and W, placed in different specimen rods. The incident proton source term for the assessment was produced with a gamma mapping measurement performed on the proton beam entrance window. The fluences of protons and neutrons as well as the energy deposition in the SINQ Target 10 were calculated. At an average proton beam current of 1.45 mA, the peak proton and neutron fluxes are 2.28 × 10 14 p/cm 2 /s and 5.60 × 10 14 n/cm 2 /s, respectively. The maximum irradiation dose and helium productions for steel specimens are 26.5 dpa and 2240 appm, respectively.

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 score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B Beam Interactions with Materials and AtomsSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207