Benchmarking MCNP and WIMS/RFSP against Measurement Data—I: Deuterium Critical Assembly
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benchmark calculations have been performed for the conventional Canadian deuterium uranium (CANDU) core analysis code RFSP and the Monte Carlo code MCNP-4B using experimental data from the deuterium critical assembly. The benchmark calculation was carried out for the effective multiplication factor (keff), void reactivity, local power peaking factor (LPPF), and power distribution of a uniform core with 1.2 wt% UO2 and two-region cores with PuO2-UO2 fuels. The RFSP calculation was performed with two energy groups, using lattice parameters generated by WIMS-AECL with the ENDF/B-V cross-section library. The RFSP calculation has shown that the root-mean-square (rms) errors of the keff and the void reactivity are within 0.6% δk and 0.3% δ(1/k), respectively. The MCNP simulation was performed using a fully heterogeneous core model that explicitly describes the individual fuel rod and channel. The simulation showed an excellent agreement for the keff against the measurement, while the rms error of the void reactivity was 0.4% δ(1/k). The LPPF and core power distribution estimated by both codes matched those of the measurements within 4 and 9%, respectively. Conclusively, the physics analysis by the RFSP code in conjunction with the WIMS-AECL produces credible results for the light water–cooled and heavy water–moderated system. In addition, the MCNP-4B code has proved its potential as a computational benchmarking tool for the heavy water–moderated system.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it