「ふげん」照射用ガドリニア燃料集合体の照射後試験報告書(III) 最終報告書
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The E09 fuel assembly was irradiated in the FUGEN from February 1990 to January 1997. The fuel assembly was the highest burn-up assembly in FUGEN and the pellet peak burn-up reached about 48 GWd/t. The E09 fuel assembly was transported to Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) Tokai in 2001. Post Irradiation Examinations (PIE) were started in July 2001, and all PIE items were completed by March 2005. The irradiation behavior of E09 MOX fuel was evaluated from the result of PIE. The major results are as follows; The integrity of E09 fuel assembly and fuel rods was confirmed. The corrosion behavior of ATR MOX fuel cladding was similar to that of LWR-UO2 fuel cladding. The central void was observed in outer ring samples irradiated with the maximum linear power over 45kW/m. A porous fine structure, similar to the rim structure seen in LWR-UO$_{2}$ pellet, was observed in the circumferential region of MOX pellet and around the plutonium-rich spots. The MOX fuel properties irradiated up to ~48 GWd/t, which are pellet swelling, thermal conductivity, pellet melting temperature and diffusivity of fission gas, were similar to LWR-UO$_{2}$ fuel properties. These results will be used for CANDU-OPTION program, which is one of Russian surplus weapon plutonium disposition programs with AECL in Canada, and available for LWR plutonium recycle program in Japan.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".