Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations
Volume 2017, Article ID 2679243, 16 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2679243
Research Article

Comprehensive Uncertainty Quantification in Nuclear Safeguards

1SGIM/Nuclear Fuel Cycle Information Analysis, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
2International Safeguards, Institute of Energy and Climate Research, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Jülich, Germany

Correspondence should be addressed to T. Burr; gro.aeai@rrub.t

Received 12 March 2017; Accepted 13 June 2017; Published 12 September 2017

Academic Editor: Oleg Melikhov

Copyright © 2017 E. Bonner et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. E. Bonner, T. Burr, T. Guzzardo et al., “Improving the effectiveness of safeguards through comprehensive uncertainty quantification,” Journal of Nuclear Materials Management, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 53–61, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  2. T. Burr, T. Krieger, C. Norman, and K. Zhao, “The impact of metrology study sample size on uncertainty in IAEA safeguards calculations,” EPJ Nuclear Sciences & Technologies, vol. 2, p. 36, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  3. JCGM 104:2009, Evaluation of measurement data- an introduction to the “Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement,” 2009.
  4. R. Miller, Beyond ANOVA: basics of applied statistics, Chapman & Hall, 1986. View at MathSciNet
  5. W. Bich, “Revision of the ‘guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement’. Why and how,” Metrologia, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. S155–S158, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. C. Elster, “Bayesian uncertainty analysis compared with the application of the GUM and its supplements,” Metrologia, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. S159–S166, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. T. Burr, S. Croft, K. Jarman, A. Nicholson, C. Norman, and S. Walsh, “Improved uncertainty quantification in nondestructive assay for nonproliferation,” Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, vol. 159, pp. 164–173, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. R. Willink, Measurement Uncertainty and Probability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  9. M. Thompson and S. L. R. Ellison, “Dark uncertainty,” Accreditation and Quality Assurance, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 483–487, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. T. Deutler, “Grubbs-type estimators for reproducibility variances in an interlaboratory test study,” Journal of Quality Technology, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 324–335, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  11. ISO 21748:2010 Guidance for the use of repeatability, reproduciblity, and trueness estimates in measurement uncertianty estimation.
  12. K. Martin and A. Böckenhoff, “Analysis of short-term systematic measurement error variance for the difference of paired data without repetition of measurement,” AStA. Advances in Statistical Analysis. A Journal of the German Statistical Society, vol. 91, no. 3, pp. 291–310, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  13. F. Lombard and C. J. Potgieter, “Another look at the Grubbs estimators,” Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 74–80, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. A. Possolo and B. Toman, “Assessment of measurement uncertainty via observation equations,” Metrologia, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 464–475, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. Thompson, “Scoring the sum of correlated results in analytical proficiency testing,” Analytical Methods, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 976-977, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. C.-L. Cheng and J. W. Van Ness, Kendall’s Library of Statistics 6 Statistical Regression with Measurement Error, vol. 6, Oxford University Press Inc., New York, NY, USA, 1999. View at MathSciNet
  17. T. Burr, S. Croft, T. Krieger, K. Martin, C. Norman, and S. Walsh, “Uncertainty quantification for radiation measurements: Bottom-up error variance estimation using calibration information,” Applied Radiation and Isotopes, vol. 108, pp. 49–57, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. E. J. Williams, “A Note on Regression Methods in Calibration,” Technometrics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 189–192, 1969. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. G. Marsaglia, “Ratios of normal variables,” Journal of Statistical Software, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1–10, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. P. A. Parker, G. G. Vining, S. R. Wilson, J. L. Szarka III, and N. G. Johnson, “The prediction properties of classical and inverse regression for the simple linear calibration problem,” Journal of Quality Technology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 332–347, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. R. G. Krutchkoff, “Classical and inverse regression methods of calibration,” Technometrics. A Journal of Statistics for the Physical, Chemical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 9, pp. 425–439, 1967. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  22. R. G. Krutchkoff, “Classical and Inverse Regression Methods of Calibration in Extrapolation,” Technometrics, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 605–608, 1969. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. S. Croft, T. Burr, A. Favalli, and A. Nicholson, “Analysis of calibration data for the uranium active neutron coincidence counting collar with attention to errors in the measured neutron coincidence rate,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, vol. 811, pp. 70–75, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. T. Burr, S. Croft, D. Dale, A. Favalli, B. Weaver, and B. Williams, “Emerging applications of bottom-up uncertainty quantification in nondestructive assay,” ESARDA Bulletin, vol. 53, pp. 54–61, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  25. R: A language and environment for statistical Computing, R Development Core Team, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2008.
  26. ASTM C1514, Standard test method for measurement of 235U fraction using the enrichment meter principle, 2008.
  27. P. Henriksen, H. Menlove, J. Stewart, S. Qiao, T. Wenz, and G. Verrecchia, “Neutron collar calibration and evaluation for assay of LWR fuel assemblies containing burnable neutron absorbers,” Tech. Rep. LA-11965-MS, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. T. L. Burr and G. S. Hemphill, “Multiple-component radiation-measurement error models,” Applied Radiation and Isotopes, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 379–385, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. W. Horwitz, “Evaluation of Analytical Methods Used for Regulation of Foods and Drugs,” Analytical Chemistry, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 67A–76A, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  30. J. Jaech, Statistical Analysis of Measurement Errors, Exxon Monograph Series, Wiley Sons, New York, 1985.
  31. T. Burr, K. Martin, and T. Krieger, “The analysis of measurement errors as outlined in GUM and in the IAEA statistical methodologies for safeguards: a comparison in the IAEA's statistical methodologies for safeguards, Linking Strategy, Implementation,” in Proceedings of the Symposium on International Safeguards, 2014.
  32. J. Hartung, “Nonnegative minimum biased invariant estimation in variance component models,” The Annals of Statistics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 278–292, 1981. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  33. N. Draper and I. Guttman, “Two simultaneous measurement procedures: a Bayesian approach,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 70, pp. 43–46, 1975. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  34. S. Moussaoui, C. Carteret, D. Brie, and A. Mohammad-Djafari, “Bayesian analysis of spectral mixture data using Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods,” Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 137–148, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. P. Fearnhead and D. Prangle, “Constructing summary statistics for approximate BAYesian computation: semi-automatic approximate BAYesian computation,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B. Statistical Methodology, vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 419–474, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  36. P. Joyce and P. Marjoram, “Approximately sufficient statistics and Bayesian computation,” Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, vol. 7, no. 1, Article 26, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  37. T. Burr and A. Skurikhin, “Selecting summary statistics in approximate bayesian computation for calibrating stochastic models,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2013, Article ID 210646, 10 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. T. Burr and M. S. Hamada, “Revisiting statistical aspects of nuclear material accounting,” Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, vol. 2013, Article ID 961360, 15 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. T. Burr, M. S. Hamada, L. Ticknor, and J. Sprinkle, “Hybrid statistical testing for nuclear material accounting data and/or process monitoring data in nuclear safeguards,” Energies, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 501–528, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. T. Burr and M. S. Hamada, “Bayesian updating of material balances covariance matrices using training data,” nternational Journal of Prognostics and Health Monitoring, vol. 5, no. 1, 13 pages, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  41. T. Speed and D. Culpin, “The role of statistics in nuclear materials accounting: issues and problems,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B, vol. 149, no. 4, pp. 281–313, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  42. A. S. Goldman, J. P. Shipley, and R. R. Picard, “Statistical methods for nuclear materials safeguards: An overview,” Technometrics, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 267–274, 1982. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. R. R. Picard, “Sequential analysis of materials balances,” Nuclear materials management, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 38–42, 1987. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. R. Avenhaus and J. Jaech, “On subdividing material balances in time and/or space,” Nuclear materials management, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 24–33, 1981. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. B. Jones, “Calculation of diversion detection using the SITMUF sequence and pages test: application to evaluation of facility designs,” in Proceedings of the 7th ESARDA Symposium on Safeguards and Nuclear Material Management, Liege, Belgium, 1985.
  46. B. Jones, “Calculation of diversion detection using the SITMUF sequence and pages test: response to abrupt and protracted diversion,” in Proceedings of the in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Nuclear Material Safeguards, IAEA-SM-293/23, Vienna, Austria, 1986.
  47. B. Jones, “Comparison of near real time materials accountancy using SITMUF and Pages test with conventional accountancy,” in in Proceedings of the 9th ESARDA Symposium on Safeguards and Nuclear Material Management, London, UK, 1987.
  48. B. Jones, “Near real time materials accountancy using SITMUF and a joint Pages test: dependence of response on balance frequency,” in Proceedings of the in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Facility Operations-Safeguards Interface, San Diego, Calif, USA, 1987.
  49. B. Jones, “Near real time materials accountancy using SITMUF and a joint Pages test: comparison with MUF and CUMUF tests,” ESARDA Bulletin, vol. 15, pp. 0–26, 1988. View at Google Scholar
  50. B. Jones, “Near real time materials accountancy using SITMUF and a joint pages test: improvement of the test,” ESARDA Bulletin, vol. 16, pp. 13–19, 1989. View at Google Scholar
  51. R. Seifert, The GEMUF test: a new sequential test for detecting loss of material in a sequence of accounting periods, Nuclear safeguards technology, 1986, http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/18/086/18086510.pdf.
  52. E. S. Page, “Continuous inspection schemes,” Biometrika, vol. 41, pp. 100–114, 1954. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  53. D. Brook and D. A. Evans, “An approach to the probability distribution of cusum run length,” Biometrika, vol. 59, pp. 539–549, 1972. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  54. T. L. Burr, T. E. Sampson, and D. T. Vo, “Statistical evaluation of fram γ-ray isotopic analysis data,” Applied Radiation and Isotopes, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 931–940, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus