Initialising ...
Initialising ...
Initialising ...
Initialising ...
Initialising ...
Initialising ...
Initialising ...
Pinak, M.
Journal of Computational Chemistry, 22(15), p.1723 - 1731, 2001/11
Times Cited Count：3 Percentile：21.87(Chemistry, Multidisciplinary)no abstracts in English
Kamiya, Tomihiro; Yokota, Wataru; Kobayashi, Yasuhiko; Cholewa, M.*; Krochmal, M. S.*; Laken, G.*; Larsen, I. D.*; Fiddes, L.*; Parkhill, G.*; Dowsey, K.*
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B, 181(1-4), p.27 - 31, 2001/07
Times Cited Count：30 Percentile：87.82(Instruments & Instrumentation)no abstracts in English
Sobajima, Makoto
Enerugi, (11), p.58 - 61, 2000/11
no abstracts in English
Pinak, M.
Proceedings of 10th International Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA-10) (CD-ROM), 5 Pages, 2000/00
no abstracts in English
Pinak, M.*
JAERI-Research 98-074, 37 Pages, 1999/01
JAERI-Research-98-074.pdf:1.64MB
no abstracts in English
Sobajima, Makoto
Genshiryoku eye, 44(11), p.54 - 59, 1998/11
no abstracts in English
Ebihara, Kenishi
JAERI-Research 97-031, 46 Pages, 1997/05
JAERI-Research-97-031.pdf:2.52MB
no abstracts in English
Yamada, Yasusada*; Watanabe, Noboru*; Niimura, Nobuo*; Morii, Yukio; Katano, Susumu; Aizawa, Kazuya; Suzuki, Junichi; ; Osakabe, Toyotaka
JAERI-Review 96-019, 43 Pages, 1997/01
JAERI-Review-96-019.pdf:1.96MB
no abstracts in English
; Yokobayashi, Masao; Tanabe, Fumiya; *
VTT Symp. 158: 5th European Conf. on Cognitive Science Approaches to Process Control, 0, p.338 - 347, 1995/00
no abstracts in English
Choi, B.; Nishida, Akemi; Takada, Tsuyoshi*
no journal, ,
In this paper, in order to clarify the influence of difference due to modeling methods on the results of seismic response analysis for a nuclear facility, seismic response analysis using various earthquake events was conducted and the findings obtained from the uncertainty assessment of the response result due to the difference in modeling methods are reported.
Miyano, Hiroshi*; Muramatsu, Ken*; Noguchi, Kazuhiko*; Narumiya, Yoshiyuki*; Takata, Takashi; Muta, Hitoshi*; Itoi, Tatsuya*; Matsumoto, Masaaki*; Matsunaga, Yoko*; Sugiyama, Kenichiro*
no journal, ,
In considering nuclear safety, it is an important task to clarify the relationship with "peace of mind" that is the heart of people. What is the state that scientific safety is something that people feel safe? We considered the relationship between quantified risk and safety, and ways to acquire peace of mind. We analyzed the thresholds of safety risks as a social common, showed a safe condition, and showed the importance of forming a consensus to obtain peace of mind.
Choi, B.; Nishida, Akemi; Muramatsu, Ken*; Takada, Tsuyoshi*
no journal, ,
no abstracts in English
Zheng, X.; Tamaki, Hitoshi; Sugiyama, Tomoyuki
no journal, ,
Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) is an approach to quantifying risk of accidents including their stochastic uncertainties and consequences. However, because of inadequate understanding of phenomena, PRA results involve epistemic uncertainties. In this study, from the perspective of probability-of-frequency, we compared approaches of conventional PRA and dynamic PRA. Dynamic PRA has the advantages in the treatment of dependencies between accident progression and failure modes, so it is an advanced approach possible to mitigate epistemic uncertainties.
Batsaikhan, M.; Oba, Hironori; Karino, Takahiro; Akaoka, Katsuaki; Wakaida, Ikuo
no journal, ,
