Skip to main content

Showing 1–3 of 3 results for author: Scopatz, A M

.
  1. arXiv:1511.09095  [pdf, ps, other

    physics.data-an

    Non-judgemental Dynamic Fuel Cycle Benchmarking

    Authors: Anthony Michael Scopatz

    Abstract: This paper presents a new fuel cycle benchmarking analysis methodology by coupling Gaussian process regression, a popular technique in Machine Learning, to dynamic time warping, a mechanism widely used in speech recognition. Together they generate figures-of-merit that are applicable to any time series metric that a benchmark may study. The figures-of-merit account for uncertainty in the metric it… ▽ More

    Submitted 29 November, 2015; originally announced November 2015.

    Comments: Number of Pages: 33, Number of Tables: 1, Number of Figures: 12

  2. arXiv:1511.05619  [pdf, ps, other

    cs.SE

    Cyclus Archetypes

    Authors: Anthony M. Scopatz, Matthew J. Gidden, Robert W. Carlsen, Robert R. Flanagan, Kathryn D. Huff, Meghan B. McGarry, Arrielle C. Opotowsky, Olzhas Rakhimov, Zach Welch, Paul P. H. Wilson

    Abstract: The current state of nuclear fuel cycle simulation exists in highly customized form. Satisfying a wide range of users requires model modularity within such a tool. Cyclus is a fuel cycle simulator specifically designed to combat the lack of adaptability of previous generations of simulators. This is accomplished through an agent-based infrastructure and treating time discretely. The Cyclus kernel… ▽ More

    Submitted 17 November, 2015; originally announced November 2015.

  3. arXiv:1509.03604  [pdf, other

    cs.SE cs.CE cs.MA cs.MS

    Fundamental concepts in the Cyclus nuclear fuel cycle simulation framework

    Authors: Kathryn D. Huff, Matthew J. Gidden, Robert W. Carlsen, Robert R. Flanagan, Meghan B. McGarry, Arrielle C. Opotowsky, Erich A. Schneider, Anthony M. Scopatz, Paul P. H. Wilson

    Abstract: As nuclear power expands, technical, economic, political, and environmental analyses of nuclear fuel cycles by simulators increase in importance. To date, however, current tools are often fleet-based rather than discrete and restrictively licensed rather than open source. Each of these choices presents a challenge to modeling fidelity, generality, efficiency, robustness, and scientific transparenc… ▽ More

    Submitted 11 March, 2016; v1 submitted 11 September, 2015; originally announced September 2015.

    ACM Class: D.2.13; I.6.7; I.6.8; D.2.4

    Journal ref: Advances in Engineering Software, Volume 94, April 2016, Pages 46-59