Semi-empirical model to determine pre- and post-neutron fission product yields and neutron multiplicity
Authors:
Jounghwa Lee,
Young-Ouk Lee,
Tae-Sun Park,
Peter Schillebeeckx,
Seung-Woo Hong
Abstract:
Post-neutron emission fission product mass distributions are calculated by using pre-neutron emission fission product yields (FPYs) and neutron multiplicity. A semi-empirical model is used to calculate the pre-neutron FPY, first. Then the neutron multiplicity for each fission fragment mass is used to convert the pre-neutron FPY to the post-neutron FPY. In doing so, assumptions are made for the pro…
▽ More
Post-neutron emission fission product mass distributions are calculated by using pre-neutron emission fission product yields (FPYs) and neutron multiplicity. A semi-empirical model is used to calculate the pre-neutron FPY, first. Then the neutron multiplicity for each fission fragment mass is used to convert the pre-neutron FPY to the post-neutron FPY. In doing so, assumptions are made for the probability for a pre-emission fission fragment with a mass number $A^*$ to decay to a post-emission fragment with a mass number $A$. The resulting post-neutron FPYs are compared with the data available. The systems where the experimental data of not only the pre- and post-neutron FPY but also neutron multiplicity are available are the thermal neutron-induced fission of $^{233}$U, $^{235}$U and $^{239}$Pu. Thus, we applied the model calculations to these systems and compared the calculation results with those from the GEF and the data from the ENDF and the EXFOR libraries. Both the pre- and post-neutron fission product mass distributions calculated by using the semi-empirical model and the neutron multiplicity reproduce the overall features of the experimental data.
△ Less
Submitted 10 March, 2022;
originally announced March 2022.
Unrecognized Sources of Uncertainties (USU) in Experimental Nuclear Data
Authors:
R. Capote,
S. Badikov,
A. Carlson,
I. Duran,
F. Gunsing,
D. Neudecker,
V. G. Pronyaev,
P. Schillebeeckx,
G. Schnabel,
D. L. Smith,
A. Wallner
Abstract:
Evaluated nuclear data uncertainties are often perceived as unrealistic, most often because they are thought to be too small. The impact of this issue in applied nuclear science has been discussed widely in recent years. Commonly suggested causes are: poor estimates of specific error components, neglect of uncertainty correlations, and overlooked known error sources. However, instances have been r…
▽ More
Evaluated nuclear data uncertainties are often perceived as unrealistic, most often because they are thought to be too small. The impact of this issue in applied nuclear science has been discussed widely in recent years. Commonly suggested causes are: poor estimates of specific error components, neglect of uncertainty correlations, and overlooked known error sources. However, instances have been reported where very careful, objective assessments of all known error sources have been made with realistic error magnitudes and correlations provided, yet the resulting evaluated uncertainties still appear to be inconsistent with observed scatter of predicted mean values. These discrepancies might be attributed to significant unrecognized sources of uncertainty (USU) that limit the accuracy to which these physical quantities can be determined. The objective of our work has been to develop procedures for revealing and including USU estimates in nuclear data evaluations involving experimental input data. We conclude that the presence of USU may be revealed, and estimates of magnitudes made, through quantitative analyses. This paper identifies several specific clues that can be explored by evaluators in identifying the existence of USU. It then describes numerical procedures to generate quantitative estimates of USU magnitudes. Key requirements for these procedures to be viable are that sufficient numbers of data points be available, for statistical reasons, and that additional supporting information about the measurements be provided by the experimenters. Realistic examples are described to illustrate these procedures and demonstrate their outcomes as well as limitations. Our work strongly supports the view that USU is an important issue in nuclear data evaluation, with significant consequences for applications, and that this topic warrants further investigation by the nuclear science community.
△ Less
Submitted 2 November, 2019;
originally announced November 2019.
