MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

International radioactive waste for long-time disposal

2020· dissertation· en· W6964841911 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuereposiTUm (TU Wien) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Ecology and Soil Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Eye InstituteInternational Atomic Energy AgencyNationale Genossenschaft für die Lagerung radioaktiver AbfälleNuclear Waste Management OrganizationNuclear Decommissioning Authority
KeywordsWork (physics)Dispose patternContext (archaeology)LimitingGovernment (linguistics)Hexamethylbenzene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis aims to reflect upon a problem of creating an International repository for long-term disposal of high-level radioactive waste. At the moment, there is no solution to the problem of long-term disposal of spent nuclear fuel and highly radioactive waste, although volumes of the latter are rapidly growing. The author of the thesis uses her academic background to tackle the issue from political, socio-economic and technical points of view. Approximately 270 000 tons of spent nuclear fuel have been saved up and its number increases by 12 000 tons annually. The overload of on-site repositories requires prompt measures to replace storage with disposal. The option of managing those waste on the best possible terms, implying finding the safest, most technically advanced and legally proven solution was advised by IAEA in a context of building an International Deep geological repository for High-level waste (HLW) long-term storage. The findings indicate that many countries have already accepted the technology of Deep geological storage for HLW as the most advanced nowadays, from all of the existing HLW management strategies. However, not all of those countries own technical and economic capacities for implementing domestic programmes for HLW Deep geological storage. Moreover, the insecure level of communication with public within some countries, brings mistrust towards the scientifically proven projects and triggers protest and unacceptance, that postpones an acute problem solution for later generations. In this context, the options of reaching international cooperation via building the Deep geological repository for SNF and HLW under the aegis of the IAEA, could bring Member States a big step forward towards a long-term nuclear waste disposal.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.222 · 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