Abstract
The Pál-Bell equation is a backward-type master equation that describes the probability generating function (PGF) of neutron counts in a neutron multiplication system. Thanks to the Pál-Bell equation with the two-forked and the fundamental mode approximations, an analytical solution of PGF of neutron counts in a source-driven subcritical system can be theoretically derived. This theoretical derivation clarifies that the unique combination number of double factorial (2n−3)!! does exist in the ratio of the higher-order neutron correlation factors measured in a critical state even for any kind of fissile and moderator materials. Additionally, the unique combination numbers are experimentally validated for the order 3 ≤ n ≤ 6 through reactor noise measurements in actual subcritical systems. This knowledge can be used to judge whether a target system is in a deep subcritical state or to roughly estimate the magnitude of subcriticality, based on the factorial moments of the measured reactor noise in a zero-power state.
I. INTRODUCTION
We have been investigating subcriticality measurement techniques for an unknown system where detailed information about nuclide composition and geometry is not available for preliminary numerical analysis to evaluate some required parameters such as point kinetics parameters and the spatial correlation factor. As a measurement technique, we focus on reactor noise analysis methods.Citation1–5 The second-order neutron correlation factor and the higher-order neutron correlation factors can be estimated by statistically analyzing the measured time-series data of neutron counts with a counting gate of width . Considering that the neutron correlation is derived from the fission chain reaction, the experimental results of and can be useful in estimating subcriticality.
Our previous study theoretically clarified that the third-order and fourth-order neutron correlation factors and can be approximated as functions of the second-order factor (CitationRefs. 6 and Citation7). Here, and represent measures of relative deviations for skewness and kurtosis from those of the Poisson distribution and are defined using the third-order and fourth-order moments shown later in EquationEqs. (37)(37) (37) and (Equation38(38) (38) ), respectively. If the neutron-counting gate of width is sufficiently large and the subcriticality −ρ is approximately less than 10%dk/k, the saturation values and (hereinafter denoted as and ) are almost equal to unique numbers “3” and “15” for any subcritical system.
In order to rigorously consider three-forked and four-forked branch effects, the previous theoretical derivation was based on the first-order to fourth-order detector importance functionsCitation6,Citation8 and the fundamental mode approximation of the -eigenfunction. As the target system approaches a critical state (i.e., ), and converge to “3” and “15” without depending on fissile and moderator materials. Thus, these unique numbers “3” and “15” are characteristic values in a critical state even for any kind of fissile and moderator materials. Therefore, the difference between and “3” can be used to statistically determine whether the state is critical or subcritical.
In addition, this difference can be utilized to roughly estimate the absolute value of the subcriticality in the absence of detailed information on the target system. Experimental validation of these unique numbers for and has been presented in previous studies.Citation6,Citation9
Now, let us consider much higher neutron correlation factors when . Here, the physical meaning of is the strength of neutron correlation due to the detection processes for a group of neutrons (e.g., doublet, triplet, quartet, quintet, and sextet for ) belonging to the same fission chain family. As the order of increases, the theoretical derivation of becomes more complex. Therefore, it is difficult to clarify whether the saturation value converges a unique number in the critical state. Although we alternatively used a heuristic method for a binary tree of a fission chain having times of two-forked branches, we conjectured that could be expressed as a combination number of double factorial (CitationRefs. 6 and Citation10).
For example, let us suppose that specific three or four neutrons (triplet or quartet) belong to the same fission chain with two or three times two-forked branches and that each neutron is detected at , , or where . Then, by considering that one of three neutrons is detected at or just after the first branch, the total number of combinations for the specific triplet is 3. Similarly, the total number of combinations for the specific quartet is counted as 15, i.e., (4 cases: one of four neutrons is detected at , , or just after the first branch) × (combinations of triplet for other three neutrons) + [3 cases: two of four neutrons are detected at , or just after the first branch] . Because the above-mentioned conjecture is based on a quite heuristic method, the more sophisticated theoretical derivation for for any system in the critical state was an unresolved problem in our previous study.Citation6 In this study, we aim to theoretically derive using the Pál-Bell equation to help reconfirm the historical efforts of Lénárd Pál on the neutron-detection probability theory.
The remainder of this paper proceeds as follows. Secion II describes the Pál-Bell equation,Citation11,Citation12 followed by the theoretical derivation of the Pál-Mogil’ner-Zolotukhin-Bell-Babala (PMZBB) distribution-generating function.Citation13–18 Furthermore, we derive the theoretical value of in the critical state using the theoretical formula of the PMZBB distribution-generating function. The unique combination numbers for are validated in Sec. III through reactor noise experiments conducted at actual subcritical cores of the Kyoto University Critical AssemblyCitation19,Citation20 (KUCA). Finally, Sec. IV presents the concluding remarks.
II. THEORY
II.A. Pál-Bell Equation
Let us assume that the neutron counts are detected within the counting gate of width after one neutron is born at () in the subcritical system. Note that the birth time and the counting time interval is to give the final condition at . If the probability of neutron counts is expressed as , the probability generating function (PGF) can be defined asCitation1,Citation2
By considering the balance equation for the probabilities of neutron counts between and and utilizing the mathematical property that the convolution of probabilities can be transformed into the product of PGF , the time-differential equation of PGF can be obtained as followsCitation1,Citation8,Citation11,Citation12:
and
where
= | = | gate function for neutron detection |
= | = | macroscopic detection cross section |
and the other notations represent conventional terms in this research field. Note that the macroscopic total cross section in EquationEq. (2)(2) (2) is given by . Considering that this study aims to clarify the nature of the neutron correlation factors at the limit of , EquationEq. (2)(2) (2) does not explicitly treat the difference between prompt and delayed fission neutrons. Because no neutrons are counted after the counting gate is closed at , i.e., , PGF satisfies the following final condition:
To further transform EquationEq. (2(2) (2) ), another PGF is defined as
Additionally, the following binomial expansion is utilized to transform EquationEq. (2)(2) (2) into an expression using the Boltzmann operator:
and
where is the energy-averaged and angular-averaged PGF where the weighting function is the fission spectrum . Finally, the Pál-Bell equation, which is the adjoint Boltzmann equation for PGF , can be obtained asCitation1,Citation11,Citation12,Citation21
where the brackets represent the expected value and is the adjoint Boltzmann operator given as
II.B. PMZBB Distribution-Generating Function
Although EquationEq. (8)(8) (8) is the rigorous master equation for PGF , deriving the analytical solution is difficult owing to the nonlinear term . Therefore, an analytical solution of PGF for a shallow subcritical system can be obtained by applying approximations to EquationEq. (8)(8) (8) .
First, the two-forked approximation is utilized to neglect the higher terms for (CitationRef. 12), given as
As the subcritical system approaches the critical state, the contribution of the two-forked branch to the neutron correlation factors becomes larger than that of the more-forked branches, e.g., the three-forked and four-forked terms due to and , respectively.Citation5,Citation6
Second, if the subcriticality is shallow, the fundamental mode approximation is reasonably applicable. Therefore, let us assume that PGF can be expressed only by the fundamental mode of the adjoint eigenfunction (Ref. 12):
and
where
= | = | expansion coefficient corresponding to the fundamental mode |
= | = | forward and adjoint eigenfunctions for the neutron decay constant -eigenvalue equations, respectively, given asCitation12,Citation22,Citation23 |
and
For simplicity, the forward and adjoint eigenfunctions and are normalized as
By substituting EquationEq. (11)(11) (11) into EquationEq. (10)(10) (10) and utilizing the orthogonality condition of and , the following Riccati-type differential equation for the expansion coefficient can be derived:
and
By solving EquationEq. (17)(17) (17) with the final condition of at , the analytical solution can be obtained as
and
where corresponds to the saturation value of the second-order neutron correlation factor owing to the only fission neutron multiplicity and is introduced to simply express the analytical solution.
Now, let us assume that the neutron counts are detected within the counting gate of width when the external neutron source exists in the subcritical system from the infinite past. By denoting the probability as , PGF can be expressed in the same manner as EquationEq. (1)(1) (1) :
By considering the probability-balance between and as presented in previous studies,Citation8,Citation24 the relationship between and can be derived as
and
where
= | = | source intensity for the external neutron source |
= | = | probability that neutrons are emitted per decay of the external source |
= | = | energy spectrum of the external source |
= | = | energy-averaged and angular-averaged PGF, where is the weighting function. |
By applying the two-forked and the fundamental mode approximations, EquationEq. (25)(25) (25) can be further simplified as
and
By carefully solving the time integral in EquationEq. (27)(27) (27) using the analytical solution of EquationEq. (21), the analytical solution of the PMZBB distribution-generating function can be finally derived asCitation13–18
and
where is the expected value of the neutron counts during the counting gate of width , and and are defined by EquationEq. (19)(19) (19) when and 2, respectively. Note that EquationEqs. (31)(31) (31) and (Equation32(32) (32) ) are approximated using the relationship between the neutron decay constant and subcriticality, i.e., (CitationRef. 23).
If is sufficiently larger than the inverse of the neutron decay constant , EquationEq. (30)(30) (30) can be further simplified, which is called the saturated PMZBB distribution-generating function as
II.C. Unique Combination Number for the Higher-Order Neutron Correlation Factor
Using the mathematical property of PGF , the n’th-order neutron correlation factor can be defined by the n’th-order differentiation of the natural logarithm of () asCitation6,Citation7
and
For example, based on EquationEq. (34(34) (34) ), the definitions of up to can be expressed by the following expressions using the n’th-order factorial moments of neutron counts:
and
where is the n’th-order factorial moment of neutron counts while variable is omitted to simplify the expression.
Thanks to the analytical solution of the saturated PGF shown in EquationEq. (33(33) (33) ), the saturation value of ’th order neutron correlation factor can be theoretically derived as
For example, when , the saturation value of the second-order correlation factor is given as
EquationEquation (43)(43) (43) is identical to the theoretical expression of derived in previous studies for multiple emission sources.Citation6,Citation25
In addition, using EquationEqs. (33)(33) (33) and (Equation42(42) (42) ), EquationEq. (44)(44) (44) for can be analytically solved as
Note that EquationEq. (44)(44) (44) is derived on the two-forked branch approximation to neglect the higher-order terms owing to three-forked or more-forked branches. For example, when the three-forked branch effect is rigorously considered,Citation6 the third-order neutron correlation factor is corrected by adding the term owing to the three-forked branch, which can be expressed by a quadratic polynomial with respect to , as
If the two-forked branch approximation is applicable because of , the additional term is negligibly small. Similarly, the additional terms in for are also negligible when . Therefore, as the subcriticality approaches zero, the saturation value of converges to
Considering that the saturation value of the second-order correlation factor converges to , we can finally find that the ratio of is equal to the double factorial for any system in the critical state:
Consequently, it was clarified that the unique combination number can be easily derived from the saturated PMZBB distribution-generating function of Eq. (33).
III. EXPERIMENT
III.A. Experimental Conditions
Compared with our previous studies,Citation6,Citation9 this study aims to further validate that the ratio is approximately equal to the unique combination number for not only the order but also the much higher order in a different subcritical system. For this purpose, we analyzed two experimental results of the reactor noise measurements carried out in the A-core at KUCA (CitationRefs. 19 and Citation20). The experimental conditions are explained briefly below.
The experimental cores and loaded fuel assemblies are shown in , respectively. In these experiments, four types of fuel assemblies were used.Citation20 The normal fuel assembly (“F” marked element) comprised 60 unit fuel cells, which in turn comprised two 1/8-in.-thick highly enriched uranium–aluminum alloy (HEU) plates and one 1/8-in.-thick polyethylene plate. Two partial fuel assemblies (“40” and “14” marked elements) used the same unit fuel cell as the normal fuel, although the total numbers of unit fuel cells are 40 and 14, respectively, to adjust the excess reactivity. The test fuel assembly (“Pb” marked element) comprised 40 special unit cells sandwiched between 10 normal unit cells each on the top and bottom. The special unit cell comprised two 1/8-in.-thick HEU plates and one 1/8-in.-thick lead plate instead of a polyethylene plate.
To measure the reactor noise at zero-power states, four 3He detectors (numbers 1 through 4) were placed at the axial center positions of the ex-core reflector assemblies, which have holes of approximately 3 cm in diameter to insert detectors. A digital multichannel analyzer (MCA) (ANSeeN, HSDMCA) was used to successively measure the time-series data of the neutron-detection time. To increase detection efficiency, all time-series data employing four 3He detectors were summed up for the reactor noise analysis. As shown in , the reactor noise measurements were carried out for the following two cases. Case (a) is “all rods in with Am-Be neutron source”, and Case (b) is “shutdown without Am-Be neutron source”. In Case (a), all control and safety rods were fully inserted. Using the startup neutron source of Am-Be, the neutron count rate in Case (a) [ counts per second (cps)] was maintained by subcritical neutron multiplication. Conversely, Case (b) was in the shutdown state without the Am-Be source by fully inserting all rods and withdrawing 3 × 3 fuel and reflector assemblies, in order to reduce the statistical uncertainties of neutron correlation factors by a longer reactor noise measurement in a deeper subcritical system. Because the operating time of KUCA using the Am-Be source was limited even in a deep subcritical state, the shutdown state was utilized for the longer reactor noise measurement. The lower neutron count rate in Case (b) ( cps) was maintained using only the inherent neutron source in the HEU plates, i.e., the (α,n) reactions of 27Al owing to the α-decay of uranium isotopes.Citation26
The total measurement times of reactor noise for Cases (a) and (b) were 10 800 and 69 000 s, respectively. Based on EquationEqs. (36)(36) (36) through (Equation40(40) (40) ), the variations in the n’th-order neutron correlation factors with respect to the gate of width were analyzed for using the measured factorial moments of neutron counts. Furthermore, using the moving block bootstrap method,Citation7,Citation27,Citation28 the ratios of were calculated with statistical uncertainties, i.e., 95% bootstrap confidence interval and standard deviation.
III.B. Numerical Analysis
In this experiment, the subcriticality values for the two experimental cores of Cases (a) and (b) were not directly measured. To estimate the subcriticality for Cases (a) and (b), a numerical analysis was carried out using the continuous energy Monte Carlo codes MCNP6.2 (CitationRefs. 29 and Citation30) and Serpent 2.1.32 (CitationRef. 31) with ENDF/B-VIII.0 (CitationRef. 32). The ACE-formatted files of ENDF/B-VIII.0 were generated using the Japanese FRENDY nuclear data processing code.Citation33 In the numerical analysis, the nuclide composition and size of each material were quoted from CitationRef. 19. The total number of neutron histories was 1 billion, i.e., the neutron histories per cycle = 500 000, active cycles = 2000, and inactive cycles = 100. Along with the effective neutron multiplication factor , the effective delayed neutron fraction and the neutron generation time were also evaluated based on the iterated fission probability methodCitation34 to provide supplemental information.
summarizes the numerical results of , and for Cases (a) and (b). Both numerical results using MCNP6.2 and Serpent 2.1.32 were found to have agreed well with each other. The difference in between MCNP6.2 and Serpent 2.1.32 were small, i.e., 0.02 and 0.03%dk/k for Cases (a) and (b), respectively. Although thorough uncertainty quantification for the numerical results of is a future research topic, a posteriori nuclear data–induced uncertainties of using Whisper-1.1 (CitationRef. 35) were estimated as 0.118 and 0.120%dk/k for Cases (a) and (b), respectively. In addition, the numerical result of using MCNP6.2 with ENDF/B-VIII.0 was 0.99845 ± 0.00003 for the same core configuration in a critical state by adjusting control rods; i.e., the bias was 0.16%dk/k (CitationRef. 36). Therefore, the uncertainty of calculated was estimated to be approximately 0.2%dk/k in this study. Consequently, the magnitudes of the subcriticality for Cases (a) and (b) were estimated as 3.6 ± 0.2 and 8.7 ± 0.2%dk/k, or 4.5 ± 0.2 $ and 10.7 ± 0.2 $, respectively.
III.C. Experimental Results
shows the variations in in a semilogarithmic scale and the bootstrap 95% confidence intervals. The ratios of saturated as the counting gate of width increased. Using the Rossi- method based on the dynamic mode decomposition,Citation36,Citation37 the prompt neutron decay constant values for Cases (a) and (b) were preliminarily estimated as 1454 ± 4 1/s and 2645 ± 18 1/s, respectively. Therefore, when is sufficiently larger than , the ratios of can be regarded as the saturation values .
The experimental results in Case (a) showed that each saturation value was approximately equal to the corresponding unique combination number Considering that EquationEq. (47)(47) (47) was reasonably applicable because the relative difference between and roughly corresponds to the magnitude of the subcriticality 3.6 ± 0.2%dk/k was sufficiently smaller than 10%dk/k. Note that the statistical uncertainty of increased as the order of the neutron correlation factor increased. Therefore, the experimental validation for the higher-order neutron correlation factors when requires a longer reactor noise measurement to reduce statistical uncertainties.
In Case (b), although the order of magnitude for approximately corresponded to the unique combination number , the measured values were larger than those in Case (a). Note that the differences in between Cases (a) and (b) are visible for due to the semilogarithmic graph of . To discuss this reason, compares the two experimental results of between Cases (a) and (b). shows the same results as the corresponding values of although the vertical axis is the linear scale to enlarge the results when . Owing to the relatively small subcriticality in Case (a), the unique combination number “3” existed within the 95% bootstrap confidence interval of . In other words, a longer measurement time is required to detect a difference between and “3.”
Conversely, because the subcriticality and the total measurement time of Case (b) were deeper and longer than Case (a), the statistically significant difference between and “3” was detectable. Although the unique combination number “3” was theoretically derived based on the two-forked approximation, the three-forked branch effect should be rigorously considered to quantitively discuss the difference between and “3.” Based on EquationEqs. (43)(43) (43) and (Equation45(45) (45) ), along with the condition of the Poisson inherent neutron source owing to the (α,n) reaction, the theoretical formula of can be expressed as
In EquationEq. (48(48) (48) ), the order of magnitude of the coefficient is approximately estimated by Based on CitationRef. 38, the values of for thermal neutron–induced fission are estimated as 0.760 ± 0.010, 0.766 ± 0.007, 0.793 ± 0.010, and 0.800 ± 0.008 for the major fissile nuclides 233U, 235U, 239Pu, and 241Pu, respectively.
Furthermore, by quoting the energy dependency of the probabilities of fission neutrons for 235U, 238U, and 239Pu from CitationRef. 39, the variation of with respect to the neutron energy ( MeV) falls within the range of 0.76 to 0.85. Thus, the rough estimation is reasonable even if detailed information of nuclide composition is not available but uranium or plutonium is the main contribution to fission reactions in a target system. Therefore, EquationEq. (48)(48) (48) indicates that the difference in roughly corresponds to the magnitude of the subcriticality. For example, when s, the difference in for Case (b) was 0.090 ± 0.024, or the 95% bootstrap confidence interval was [0.051, 0.144]. This confirmed that the difference of 9.0% ± 2.4% was approximately equal to the numerical result of subcriticality %dk/k.
Consequently, the unique combination number hidden in was validated by conducting the actual reactor noise experiment for the relatively shallow subcritical core where %dk/k. Furthermore, this study also demonstrated that the difference in can be used to determine whether a target system is in a deep subcritical state (i.e., not a near-critical state) or to roughly estimate the magnitude of the subcriticality using only factorial moments of measured neutron counts if the statistically significant difference in is detectable by a sufficiently long measurement of reactor noise.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
As clarified in this study, the Pál-Bell equation with the two-forked and fundamental mode approximations enables us to theoretically derive that the ratio of neutron correlation factors is equal to the double factorial moment in a critical state even for any kind of fissile and moderator materials. Through actual experimental analysis of the relatively shallow subcritical core where %dk/k, we validated that the saturation values were approximately equal to the corresponding unique combination number for the order . Furthermore, as the subcriticality for a target system deepened, the difference between the measured ratios of and increased. Considering that the statistical uncertainty of becomes larger as the order increases, the third-order ratio was found to be practical. The presented knowledge can be used to determine whether the target system is in a deep subcritical state or to roughly estimate the magnitude of subcriticality, using the factorial moments of measured neutron counts. Note that although the unique combination number can be theoretically derived based on the two-forked approximation, the more-forked branch effect should be rigorously considered to quantitively discuss the difference between and .
Acknowledgments
We sincerely dedicate this study to Lénárd Pál, the pioneer of neutron-detection probability theory. This work was partly conducted under the Visiting Researcher’s Program of the Kyoto University. The authors are grateful to all the technical staff of KUCA for their assistance during the experiments.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Additional information
Funding
References
- M. M. R. WILLIAMS, Random Processes in Nuclear Reactors, Pergamon Press, Oxford, United Kingdom (1974).
- I. PÁZSIT and L. PÁL, Neutron Fluctuations: A Treatise on the Physics of Branching Processes, Elsevier, Oxford, United Kingdom (2008).
- R. P. FEYNMAN, F. DE HOFFMANN, and R. SERBER, “Dispersion of the Neutron Emission in U-235 Fission,” J. Nucl. Energy, 3, 1–2, 64 (1956); https://doi.org/10.1016/0891-3919(56)90042-0.
- J. B. DRAGT, “Threefold Correlations and Third Order Moments in Reactor Noise,” Nukleonik, 10, 1, 7 (1967).
- A. FURUHASHI and A. IZUMI, “Third Moment of the Number of Neutrons Detected in Short Time Intervals,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 5, 2, 48 (1968); https://doi.org/10.1080/18811248.1968.9732402.
- T. ENDO et al., “Experimental Validation of Unique Combination Numbers for Third- and Fourth-Order Neutron Correlation Factors of Zero-Power Reactor Noise,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 56, 4, 322 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2019.1580625.
- T. ENDO and A. YAMAMOTO, “Comparison of Theoretical Formulae and Bootstrap Method for Statistical Error Estimation of Feynman-α Method,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 124, 606 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.10.032.
- T. ENDO, Y. YAMANE, and A. YAMAMOTO, “Derivation of Theoretical Formula for the Third Order Neutron Correlation Technique by Using Importance Function,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 33, 10, 857 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2006.05.005.
- T. ENDO et al., “Experiment of Unique Combination Number Due to the Third-Order Neutron-Correlation,” EPJ Web Conf., 247, 09004 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202124709004.
- R. P. STANLEY, Enumerative Combinatorics, Vol. 2, Chap. 5, p. 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom (1999).
- L. PÁL, “On the Theory of Stochastic Processes in Nuclear Reactors,” Nuovo Cimento, 7, 25 (1958); https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02725086.
- G. I. BELL, “On the Stochastic Theory of Neutron Transport,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 21, 3, 390 (1965); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE65-1.
- L. PÁL, “Statistical Theory of Neutron Chain Reactions I,” Acta Phys. Hung., 14, 4, 345 (1962); https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03156679.
- L. PÁL, “Statistical Theory of Neutron Chain Reactions II,” Acta Phys. Hung., 14, 4, 357 (1962); https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03156680.
- L. PÁL, “Statistical Theory of Neutron Chain Reactions III,” Acta Phys. Hung., 14, 4, 369 (1962); https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03156681.
- V. G. ZOLOTUKHIN and A. I. MOGIL’NER, “Distribution of the Counting of a Neutron Detector Placed in a Reactor,” Sov. J. At. Energy, 10, 4, 367 (1962); https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01479942.
- G. I. BELL, “Probability Distribution of Neutrons and Precursors in a Multiplying Assembly,” Ann. Phys., 21, 2, 243 (1963); https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(63)90108-8.
- D. BABALA, “Neutron Counting Statistics in Nuclear Reactors,” KR-114, Institutt for Atomenergi (Nov. 1966).
- Accelerator-Driven System at Kyoto University Critical Assembly, C. H. PYEON, Ed., Springer Singapore, Singapore (2021); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0344-0.
- C. H. PYEON, M. YAMANAKA, and M. FUKUSHIMA, “Uncertainty Quantification of Lead and Bismuth Sample Reactivity Worth at Kyoto University Critical Assembly,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 195, 8, 877 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2020.1870861.
- K. SAITO, “Source Papers in Reactor Noise,” Prog. Nucl. Energy, 3, 3, 157 (1979); https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-1970(79)90018-0.
- G. I. BELL and S. GLASSTONE, Nuclear Reactor Theory, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York (1970).
- T. ENDO, Y. YAMANE, and A. YAMAMOTO, “Space and Energy Dependent Theoretical Formula for the Third Order Neutron Correlation Technique,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 33, 6, 521 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2006.02.002.
- I. PÁZSIT, “The Backward Theory of Stochastic Particle Transport with Multiple Emission Sources,” Phys. Scr., 59, 5, 344 (1999); https://doi.org/10.1238/Physica.Regular.059a00344.
- I. PÁZSIT and Y. YAMANE, “The Variance-to-Mean Ratio in Subcritical Systems Driven by a Spallation Source,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 25, 9, 667 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4549(97)00117-5.
- T. SHIOZAWA et al., “Investigation on Subcriticality Measurement Using Inherent Neutron Source in Nuclear Fuel,” Proc. PHYSOR 2014, Kyoto, Japan, September 28–October 3, 2014, p. 1086633, Japan Atomic Energy Agency (2015); https://doi.org/10.11484/jaea-conf-2014-003.
- H. R. KÜNSCH, “The Jackknife and the Bootstrap for General Stationary Observations,” Ann. Stat., 17, 3, 1217 (1989); https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176347265.
- P. HUMBERT, “Simulation and Analysis of List Mode Measurements on SILENE Reactor,” J. Comput. Theor. Trans., 47, 4–6, 350 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1080/23324309.2018.1477802.
- T. GOORLEY et al., “Features of MCNP6,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 87, 772 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2015.02.020.
- MCNP User’s Manual Code Version 6.2, LA-UR-17-29981, C. J. WERNER, Ed., Los Alamos National Laboratory (Oct. 2017).
- J. LEPPÄNEN et al., “The Serpent Monte Carlo Code: Status, Development and Applications in 2013,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 82, 142 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2014.08.024.
- D. A. BROWN et al., “ENDF/B-VIII.0: The 8th Major Release of the Nuclear Reaction Data Library with CIELO-Project Cross Sections, New Standards and Thermal Scattering Data,” Nucl. Data Sheets, 148, 1 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2018.02.001.
- K. TADA et al., “Development and Verification of a New Nuclear Data Processing System FRENDY,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 54, 7, 806 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2017.1309306.
- B. C. KIEDROWSKI, F. B. BROWN, and P. P. H. WILSON, “Adjoint-Weighted Tallies for k-Eigenvalue Calculations with Continuous-Energy Monte Carlo,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 168, 3, 226 (2011); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE10-22.
- B. C. KIEDROWSKI et al., “Whisper: Sensitivity/Uncertainty-Based Computational Methods and Software for Determining Baseline Upper Subcritical Limits,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 181, 1, 17 (2015); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE14-99.
- T. ENDO et al., “Application of Dynamic Mode Decomposition to Rossi-α Method in a Critical State Using File-by-File Moving Block Bootstrap Method,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. (2022); https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2022.2030260.
- F. NISHIOKA et al., “Applicability of Dynamic Mode Decomposition to Estimate Fundamental Mode Component of Prompt Neutron Decay Constant from Experimental Data,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 196, 2, 133 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2021.1968225.
- N. E. HOLDEN and M. S. ZUCKER, “Prompt Neutron Emission Multiplicity Distribution and Average Values (Nubar) at 2200 m/s for the Fissile Nuclides,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 98, 2, 174 (1988); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE88-A28498.
- M. S. ZUCKER and N. E. HOLDEN, “Energy Dependence of Neutron Multiplicity Pν in Fast Neutron Induced Fission for 235,238U and 239Pu,” BNL-38491, Brookhaven National Laboratory (1986).