Source: https://nuclear-power-engineering.ru/en/article/2018/02/15/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 01:05:09+00:00

Document:
Andrianov A.A. Korovin Yu.A. Kuptsov I.S. Konobeev A.Yu. Andrianova O.N.
The paper presents an approach to a comparative evaluation of the predictive ability of spallation reaction models based on widely used, well-proven multiple-criteria decision analysis methods (MAVT/MAUT, AHP, TOPSIS, PROMETHEE) and the results of such a comparison for 17 spallation reaction models in the presence of the interaction of high-energy protons with natPb. A multi-criteria approach to a comparative evaluation of high-energy nuclear reaction models as well as evaluated nuclear data obtained by using these models makes it possible to more finely differentiate various models with due account for experts’ opinions, which makes an additional contribution to both the understanding of nuclear reaction mechanisms and preparation of a reliable nuclear data set. The best models can be considered those of the first group including: CEM02, CEM03, Phits/jam, Cascade/ASF, Phits/Bertini. The models Bertini/Dresner, Cascade-4, INCL4/ABLA, INCL4/SMM, geant4/binary, Isabela/SMM, geant4/Bertini may be referred to the second in attractiveness group. The models Isabela/Abla, INCL4/ Gemini, CASCADeX-1.2, Isabel/Gemini, phits/jqmd, which are characterized with a greater uncertainty, may be united into the next in attractiveness group. The study has shown that if the MCDA methods are applied to evaluating the predictive ability of spallation reaction models, despite some differences in model ranking, the results obtained by using different methods turn out to give good fits. The study demonstrates that taking into account the sensitivity analysis results, an additional alternative analysis using experts’ judgments and the whole set of geographical and attributive information, it becomes possible to select the best models.
Konobeyev A.Yu., Korovin Yu.A., Pilnov G.B., Stankovskiy A.Yu., Andrianov A.A.. Transport Evaluated Files to Study Particle Transport in Materials Iradiated by Neutrons with Energies up to 150 MeV. Izvestia vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenij. Yadernaya energetika. 2004, no. 4, pp. 56-62 (in Russian).
Leray S. Needs for a benchmark of spallation models for reliable simulation of spallation related applications / PSI Proceedings 09-01. ARIA. 2009, p. 89.
Hendricks J.S. MCNPX Version 26C. Report LA-UR-06-7991, 2006.
Sato T., Niita K., Matsuda N., Hashimoto Sh., Iwamoto Y., Noda Sh., Ogawa T., Iwase H., Nakashima H., Fukahori T., Okumura K., Kai T., Chiba S., Furuta T., Sihver L. Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System, PHITS, ver. 2.52. Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 2013, v. 50, no. 9, pp. 913-923, DOI: 10.1080⁄00223131.2013.814553.
Agostinelliae S., Allisonas J., Amakoe K., Apostolakisa J. Geant4 – a Simulation Toolkit. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A. 2003, v. 506, pp. 250-303.
Battistoni G., Boehlen T., Cerutti F., Chin P.W. Overview of the FLUKA code. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2015, v. 82, pp. 10-18.
Mokhov N.V., Gudima K.K., Mashnik S.G., Kostin M. A. Physics Models in the MARS15 Code for Accelerator and Space Applications, Fermilab-Conf-04/269-AD, ND2004 paper.
Mank G., Filges D., Leray S., Yariv Y. Joint ICTP-IAEA Advanced Workshopon Model Codes for Spallation Reactions, 2008, Available at: https://www-nds.iaea.org/spallations/2008ws/mank.pdf (accessed Feb 05 2018).
Boudard A., Cugnon J., Leray S., Volant C. Intranuclear cascade model for a comprehensive description of spallation reaction data. Phys. Rev. C. 2002, v. 66, 044615, pp. 1-28.
Mashnik S. G., Gudima K. K., Prael R. E., Sierk A. J., Baznat M. I., Mokhov N. V. CEM03.03 and LAQGSM03.03 Event Generators for the MCNP6. MCNPX, and MARS15 Transport Codes, 2008. LANL Report LA-UR-08-2931.
Mashnik S. Validation and Verification of MCNP6 Against High-Energy Experimental Data and Calculations by Other Codes. II. The LAQGSM Testing Primer, 2001. LANL Report LA-UR-11-05627.
Barashenkov V.S.; Toneev V.D. Interactions of high energy particles and atomic nuclei with nuclei. Moscow. Atomizdat Publ., 1972, 351 p. (in Russian).
Barashenkov V. S., Konobeev A. Yu., Korovin Yu. A., Sosnin V. N. CASCADE/INPE code system. Atomnaya Energiya, 1999, v. 87, no. 4, pp. 742-744 (in Russian).
Andrianov A.A., Konobeev A.Yu., Korovin Yu.A., Kuptsov I.S., Stankovsky A.Yu. The improved program code CASCADeX 1.2 for spallation reactions calculation. Izvestia vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenij. Yadernaya energetika. 2011, no. 2, pp. 5-16 (in Russian).
Andrianov A.A., Korovin Y.A., Kuptsov I.S., Stankovskiy A.Y. Interactive information system for preparation and verification of nuclear data in the high-energy range. Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 2011, v. 59, no. 23, pp. 1096-1099.
Andrianov A.A., Gritsyuk S.V., Korovin Yu.A., Kuptsov I.S. Multi-criteria comparative evaluation of spallation reaction models. Vestnik natsional’nogo issledovatel’skogo yadernogo universiteta «MIFI», 2013, v. 2, no. 2, p. 226 (in Russian).
Andrianov A., Kuptsov I., Andrianova O., Konobeev A., Korovin Yu. Multi#criteria comparative evaluation of spallation reaction models. Proc.: EPJ Web of Conferences 22, 2017, Series: “ND 2016: International Conference on Nuclear Data for Science and Technology”, p. 12007.
Yatsalo B., Gritsyuk S., Sullivan T., Trump B., Linkov I. Multi-criteria risk management with the use of DecernsMCDA: methods and case studies. Environment Systems and Decisions, 2016, v. 36, no. 3, pp. 266-276. DOI: 10.1007/s10669-016-9598-1.
Hauser W., Feshbach H. The Inelastic Scattering of Neutrons. Phys. Rev. 1952, v. 87, p. 366.
Weisskopf V. F., Ewing D. H. On the Yield of Nuclear Reactions with Heavy Elements. Phys. Rev. 1940, v. 57, p. 472.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v.