{"title":"剂量学截面的研究进展","authors":"P. Griffin, C. Peters","doi":"10.1520/JAI104114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the 1980's the dosimetry community embraced the need for a high fidelity quantification of uncertainty in nuclear data used for dosimetry applications. This led to the adoption of energy-dependent covariance matrices as the accepted manner of quantifying the uncertainty data. The trend for the dosimetry community to require high fidelity treatment of uncertainty estimates has continued to the current time where requirements on nuclear data are codified in standards such as ASTM E 1018. This paper surveys the current state of the dosimetry cross sections and investigates the quality of the current dosimetry cross section evaluations by examining calculated-to-experimental ratios in neutron benchmark fields. In recent years more nuclear-related technical areas are placing an emphasis on uncertainty quantification. With the availability of model-based cross sections and covariance matrices produced by nuclear data codes, some nuclear-related communities are considering the role these covariance matrices should play. While funding within the dosimetry community for cross section evaluations has been very meager, other areas, such as the solar-related astrophysics community and the US Nuclear Criticality Safety Program, have been supporting research in the area of neutron cross sections. The Cross Section Evaluation Working Group (CSEWG) is responsible for the creation and maintenancemore » of the ENDF/B library which has been the mainstay for the reactor dosimetry community. Given the new trends in cross section evaluations, this paper explores the path forward for the US nuclear reactor dosimetry community and its use of the ENDF/B cross-sections. The major concern is maintenance of the sufficiency and accuracy of the uncertainty estimate when used for dosimetry applications. The two major areas of deficiency in the proposed ENDF/B approach are: 1) the use of unrelated covariance matrices in ENDF/B evaluations and 2) the lack of 'due consideration' of experimental data in the evaluation. (authors)« less","PeriodicalId":15057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Astm International","volume":"104 1","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Path Forward for Dosimetry Cross Sections\",\"authors\":\"P. Griffin, C. Peters\",\"doi\":\"10.1520/JAI104114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the 1980's the dosimetry community embraced the need for a high fidelity quantification of uncertainty in nuclear data used for dosimetry applications. This led to the adoption of energy-dependent covariance matrices as the accepted manner of quantifying the uncertainty data. The trend for the dosimetry community to require high fidelity treatment of uncertainty estimates has continued to the current time where requirements on nuclear data are codified in standards such as ASTM E 1018. This paper surveys the current state of the dosimetry cross sections and investigates the quality of the current dosimetry cross section evaluations by examining calculated-to-experimental ratios in neutron benchmark fields. In recent years more nuclear-related technical areas are placing an emphasis on uncertainty quantification. With the availability of model-based cross sections and covariance matrices produced by nuclear data codes, some nuclear-related communities are considering the role these covariance matrices should play. While funding within the dosimetry community for cross section evaluations has been very meager, other areas, such as the solar-related astrophysics community and the US Nuclear Criticality Safety Program, have been supporting research in the area of neutron cross sections. The Cross Section Evaluation Working Group (CSEWG) is responsible for the creation and maintenancemore » of the ENDF/B library which has been the mainstay for the reactor dosimetry community. Given the new trends in cross section evaluations, this paper explores the path forward for the US nuclear reactor dosimetry community and its use of the ENDF/B cross-sections. The major concern is maintenance of the sufficiency and accuracy of the uncertainty estimate when used for dosimetry applications. The two major areas of deficiency in the proposed ENDF/B approach are: 1) the use of unrelated covariance matrices in ENDF/B evaluations and 2) the lack of 'due consideration' of experimental data in the evaluation. (authors)« less\",\"PeriodicalId\":15057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Astm International\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Astm International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI104114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Astm International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI104114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
在20世纪80年代,剂量学界接受了对用于剂量学应用的核数据的不确定度进行高保真量化的需要。这导致采用能量相关协方差矩阵作为量化不确定性数据的公认方式。剂量学界要求对不确定性估计进行高保真度处理的趋势一直持续到目前,对核数据的要求已写入ASTM E 1018等标准。本文综述了目前剂量学截面的现状,并通过检验中子基准场的计算与实验比,探讨了目前剂量学截面评估的质量。近年来,越来越多的核相关技术领域开始重视不确定性的量化。随着核数据编码产生的基于模型的截面和协方差矩阵的可用性,一些核相关社区正在考虑这些协方差矩阵应该发挥的作用。虽然剂量学界对截面评估的资助非常少,但其他领域,如太阳相关天体物理学界和美国核临界安全计划,一直在支持中子截面领域的研究。截面评估工作组(CSEWG)负责创建和维护更多的ENDF/B库,该库一直是反应堆剂量学社区的支柱。鉴于截面评估的新趋势,本文探讨了美国核反应堆剂量学界及其使用ENDF/B截面的前进道路。主要关注的是在剂量学应用中保持不确定度估计的充分性和准确性。提出的ENDF/B方法的两个主要缺陷是:1)在ENDF/B评估中使用不相关的协方差矩阵;2)在评估中缺乏对实验数据的“适当考虑”。(作者)«更少
In the 1980's the dosimetry community embraced the need for a high fidelity quantification of uncertainty in nuclear data used for dosimetry applications. This led to the adoption of energy-dependent covariance matrices as the accepted manner of quantifying the uncertainty data. The trend for the dosimetry community to require high fidelity treatment of uncertainty estimates has continued to the current time where requirements on nuclear data are codified in standards such as ASTM E 1018. This paper surveys the current state of the dosimetry cross sections and investigates the quality of the current dosimetry cross section evaluations by examining calculated-to-experimental ratios in neutron benchmark fields. In recent years more nuclear-related technical areas are placing an emphasis on uncertainty quantification. With the availability of model-based cross sections and covariance matrices produced by nuclear data codes, some nuclear-related communities are considering the role these covariance matrices should play. While funding within the dosimetry community for cross section evaluations has been very meager, other areas, such as the solar-related astrophysics community and the US Nuclear Criticality Safety Program, have been supporting research in the area of neutron cross sections. The Cross Section Evaluation Working Group (CSEWG) is responsible for the creation and maintenancemore » of the ENDF/B library which has been the mainstay for the reactor dosimetry community. Given the new trends in cross section evaluations, this paper explores the path forward for the US nuclear reactor dosimetry community and its use of the ENDF/B cross-sections. The major concern is maintenance of the sufficiency and accuracy of the uncertainty estimate when used for dosimetry applications. The two major areas of deficiency in the proposed ENDF/B approach are: 1) the use of unrelated covariance matrices in ENDF/B evaluations and 2) the lack of 'due consideration' of experimental data in the evaluation. (authors)« less