Open Access
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 247, 2021
PHYSOR2020 – International Conference on Physics of Reactors: Transition to a Scalable Nuclear Future
Article Number 15003
Number of page(s) 8
Section Sensitivity & Uncertainty Methods
Published online 22 February 2021
  1. D. Schneider, F. Dolci, F. Gabriel, J.-M. Palau, M. Guillo, and B. Pothet. “APOLLO3: CEA/DEN deterministic multi-purpose code for reactor physics analysis.” In Proc. Int. Conf. PHYSOR 2016. American Nuclear Society, Sun Valley, Idaho, United States (2016). [Google Scholar]
  2. L. Usachev. “Perturbation theory for the breeding factor, and other ratios of a number of different processes in a reactor.” Soviet Atomic Energy, volume 15(6), pp. 1255–1265 (1963). [Google Scholar]
  3. A. Gandini. “A generalized perturbation method for bi-linear functionals of the real and adjoint neutron fluxes.” Journal of Nuclear Energy, volume 21(10), pp. 755–765 (1967). [Google Scholar]
  4. E. Greenspan. “Developments in perturbation theory.” Advances in nuclear science and technology, volume 9, pp. 181–268 (1976). [Google Scholar]
  5. M. Komata. “New Interpretations for the Usachev-Gandini Perturbation Theory.” Nuclear Science and Engineering, volume 47(4), pp. 489–493 (1972). [Google Scholar]
  6. P. Archier, A. Calloo, G. Valocchi, B. Faure, and J.-M. Palau. “Development and Verification of Perturbative Methods in the APOLLO3 Code: Sensitivity Analysis and Uncertainty Quantification Applied to Pressurized-Water and Sodium Fast Reactors.” In Proceedings of M&C 2019. Portland, OR (2019). [Google Scholar]
  7. G. Rudstem, P. Finck, A. Filip, A. DAngelo, and R. McKnight. “Delayed neutron data for the major actinides. Vol. 6.” Nuclear Energy Agency Report NEA/WPEC-6 (2002). [Google Scholar]
  8. J. Mondot et al. “EPICURE : an Experimental Programme devoted to the Validation of the Calculational Tools for Plutonium Recycling in PWRs.” In Proc. Int. Conf. PHYSOR 90. American Nuclear Society, Marseille, France (1990). [Google Scholar]
  9. J.-M. Palau et al. “Recent progress in the vv of thr french apollo3 code: 3D full core analysis of the UH1.2 integral experiment using IDT method of characteristics.” In Proceedings of the PHYSOR 2018 Conference (2018). [Google Scholar]
  10. J. Moller, J.-J. Lautard, and D. Schneider. “MINARET, a deterministic neutron transport solver for nuclear core calculations.” In Proc. Int. Conf. on Mathematics and Computational Methods Applied to Nuclear Science and Engineering (M&C2011). American Nuclear Society (2011). [Google Scholar]
  11. E. Brun, F. Damian, C. Diop, E. Dumonteil, F. Hugot, C. Jouanne, Y. Lee, F. Malvagi, A. Mazzolo, O. Petit, J. Trama, T. Visonneau, and A. Zoia. “TRIPOLI-4, CEA, EDF and AREVA reference Monte Carlo code.” Annals of Nuclear Energy, volume 82, pp. 151 – 160 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  12. G. Truchet, P. Leconte, A. Santamarina, E. Brun, F. Damian, and A. Zoia. “Computing adjoint-weighted kinetics parameters in TRIPOLI-4 by the Iterated Fission Probability method.” Annals of Nuclear Energy, volume 85, pp. 17–206 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  13. P. Archier, C. De Saint Jean, G. Noguère, et al. “COMAC: Nuclear data covariance matrices library for nuclear reactor applications.” In Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014. Kyoto, Japan (2014). [Google Scholar]
  14. I.-A. Kodeli. “Sensitivity and uncertainty in the effective delayed neutron fraction.” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, volume 715, pp. 70–78 (2013). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.