Multi-Output Gaussian Processes for Inverse Uncertainty Quantification in Neutron Noise Analysis

References

• 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.
   Google Scholar
• I. PÁZSIT and L. PÁL, Neutron Fluctuations: A Treatise on the Physics of Branching Processes, Elsevier (2007).
   Google Scholar
• D. M. CIFARELLI and W. HAGE, “Models for a Three-Parameter Analysis of Neutron Signal Correlation Measurements for Fissile Material Assay,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A, 251, 3, 550 (1986); https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(86)90651-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. M. VERBEKE, “Neutron Multiplicity Counting: Credible Regions for Reconstruction Parameters,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 182, 4, 481 (2016); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE15-35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. VERBEKE and O. PETIT, “Stochastic Analog Neutron Transport with TRIPOLI-4 and FREYA: Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification for Neutron Multiplicity Counting,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 183, 2, 214 (2016); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE15-82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. K. WILLIAMS and C. E. RASMUSSEN, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning, Vol. 2, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (2006).
   Google Scholar
• K. BÖHNEL, “The Effect of Multiplication on the Quantitative Determination of Spontaneously Fissioning Isotopes by Neutron Correlation Analysis,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 90, 1, 75 (1985); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE85-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. H. BYRD et al., “A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 16, 5, 1190 (1995); https://doi.org/10.1137/0916069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. V. BONILLA, K. CHAI, and C. WILLIAMS, “Multi-Task Gaussian Process Prediction,” Adv. Neural. Inf. Process Syst., 20, 153 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• M. TITSIAS, “Variational Learning of Inducing Variables in Sparse Gaussian Processes,” Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR 5:567-574 (2009); https://proceedings.mlr.press/v5/titsias09a.html.
   Google Scholar
• M. A. ALVAREZ and N. D. LAWRENCE, “Computationally Efficient Convolved Multiple Output Gaussian Processes,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., 12, 1459 (2011).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. C. KENNEDY and A. O’HAGAN, “Predicting the Output from a Complex Computer Code When Fast Approximations Are Available,” Biometrika, 87, 1, 1 (2000); https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/87.1.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• I.-K. YEO and R. A. JOHNSON, “A New Family of Power Transformations to Improve Normality or Symmetry,” Biometrika, 87, 4, 954 (2000); https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/87.4.954.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T. GOORLEY et al., “Initial MCNP6 Release Overview,” Nucl. Technol., 180, 3, 298 (2012); https://doi.org/10.13182/NT11-135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. TERRELL, “Distributions of Fission Neutron Numbers,” Phys. Rev., 108, 3, 783 (1957); https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.108.783.
   Google Scholar
• R. M. SAKIA, “The Box-Cox Transformation Technique: A Review,” J. R. Stat. Soc. Series D, 41, 2, 169 (1992).
   Google Scholar
• A. MARREL et al., “Calculations of Sobol Indices for the Gaussian Process Metamodel,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 94, 3, 742 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.07.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. METROPOLIS et al., “Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines,” J. Chem. Phys., 21, 6, 1087 (1953); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1699114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. K. HASTINGS, “Monte Carlo Sampling Methods Using Markov Chains and Their Applications,” Biometrika, 57, 1, 97 (1970); https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/57.1.97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. HAARIO, E. SAKSMAN, and J. TAMMINEN, “An Adaptive Metropolis Algorithm,” Bernoulli, 7, 2, 223 (2001); https://doi.org/10.2307/3318737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. GELMAN, W. R. GILKS, and G. O. ROBERTS, “Weak Convergence and Optimal Scaling of Random Walk Metropolis Algorithms,” Ann. Appl. Probab., 7, 1, 110 (1997); https://doi.org/10.1214/aoap/1034625254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. ANDRIEU and É. MOULINES, “On the Ergodicity Properties of Some Adaptive MCMC Algorithms,” Ann. Appl. Probab., 16, 3, 1462 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1214/105051606000000286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. HAARIO, E. SAKSMAN, and J. TAMMINEN, “Adaptive Proposal Distribution for Random Walk Metropolis Algorithm,” Comput. Stat., 14, 3, 375 (1999); https://doi.org/10.1007/s001800050022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. EFRON and R. J. TIBSHIRANI, An Introduction to the Bootstrap, CRC Press (1994).
   Google Scholar
• D. HIGDON et al., “Combining Field Data and Computer Simulations for Calibration and Prediction,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 26, 2, 448 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1137/S1064827503426693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. B. BRIGGS, L. SCOTT, and A. NOURI, “The International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 145, 1, 1 (2003); https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE03-14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. HUTCHINSON et al., “Validation of Statistical Uncertainties in Subcritical Benchmark Measurements: Part II—Measured Data,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 125, 342 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.10.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. K. MATTINGLY, “Polyethylene-Reflected Plutonium Metal Sphere: Subcritical Neutron and Gamma Measurements,” Sandia National Laboratories (2009).
   Google Scholar
• H. JEFFREYS, “An Invariant Form for the Prior Probability in Estimation Problems,” Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A., 186, 1007, 453 (1946).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. LARTAUD, P. HUMBERT, and J. GARNIER, “Uncertainty Quantification in Neutron Noise Analysis Using Monte-Carlo Markov Chain Methods: An Application to Nuclear Waste Drum Assay,” Proc. Int. Conf. on Physics of Reactors 2022 (PHYSOR 2022), p. 2674 (2022).
   Google Scholar
• K. KERSTING et al., “Most Likely Heteroscedastic Gaussian Process Regression,” Proc. 24th Int. Conf. on Machine Learning, p. 393 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• J. M. VERBEKE et al., “Correlated Production and Analog Transport of Fission Neutrons and Photons Using Fission Models FREYA, FIFRELIN and the Monte Carlo Code TRIPOLI-4®.” EPJ Web of Conf., Vol. 170, p. 01019, EDP Sciences (2018).
   Google Scholar