Nuclear 
Process 
Theory 

Sri 
Hartati 
Bradford G. Nickerson 

Faculty 
of Computer 
Science 
Faculty of Computer 
Science 

University 
of 
New 
Brunswick 
University of New 
Brunswick 

P.O. 
Box 
4400 
P.O. Box 4400 

Fredericton, 
N.B., 
Canada 
E3B 5A3 
Fredericton, 
N.B., Canada 
E3B 
5A3 

Abstract 
ponents of physical systems. Second is knowledge about physical interactions that follow the underlying physical 

Nuclear 
Process 
Theory 
(NPT) 
models 
nuclear 
laws. All of the methods have been developed to reason 

physics processes using a formal grammar. 
This, 
in 
about different types of physical systems. None of these 

turn, allows one to write computer 
programs 
which sim 
approaches has been developed to reason about nuclear 

ulate nuclear process inderactions. 
Knowledge 
of the 
nu 
physics processes [4]. 

clear physics 
processes is expressed in terms 
of a basic 
This paper 
introduces a method, 
called Nuclear 
Pro 

nuclear physics 
model 
and 
an 
aggregate eflects model. 
cess Theory, 
for 
reasoning about nuclear 
physics 
pro 

The basic nuclear physics model has the capability ojex 
cesses. NPT formalizes how to structure parts of the 

pressing knowledge 
of nuclear 
physics processes for 
dij 
available knowledge 
on nuclear physics 
processes to en 

jerent types of reactions. The products of reactions 
can 
able 
a computer 
program, taking 
a description 
of 
the 

be expressed in terms of either deterministic 
or proba 
topology of 
a nuclear physics process 
as 
its 
input, 
to 

bilistic values. The aggregate effects model is used to 
derive conceivable 
dynamic interactions 
in 
the system. 

simulate nuclear physics processes. 
Both 
a quantitative 
state space model 
and a probabilis 

tic space model 
of the system are incorporated. 
NPT 

integrates a symbolic, 
qualitative description 
of struc 

1 
Background 
and 
Motivation 
tural 
aspects 
of 
the process with 
a quantitative 
state 

space and probabilistic 
space model. Part 
of NPT ’s 
for 

mal description 
is contained in a context 
free grammar. 

Several attempts enable symbolic and approaches have been made to computer representation of physical systems [l, 2, 3, 6, [3,8,9, lo] incorporate 7, 8, 9, lo]. the notions Forbus and Woods of physical processes for describing provide a way the behavior of specifying of a physical system. processes and their They effects in a way that allows both deduction on what processes 
Knowledge descriptions of nuclear physics processes is expressed in of basic nuclear physics and aggregate ef fects models. NPT uses a novel approach to formalize the relationships between mathematical and probabilis tic models of nuclear physics processes. NPT can be used to reason about fission reactions with nuclear physics processes such as different types of nuclides. 

occur and how 
they might 
change. 
Forbus ’ approach 

is 
still a purely 
qualitative 
approach. By 
choosing 
a 

purely qualitative 
approach, many researchers have dis 

qualified their 
methods 
from a vast number 
of applica 
2 
Modeling 
Assumptions 

tion areas in engineering 
and science. Woods 
[lo] intro 

duced a combined 
qualitative 
and quantitative 
approach 
NPT extends the Hybrid Phenomena Theory (HPT), 

that can have 
a quantitative 
interpretation. 
His 
ap 
a framework 
for formalizing dynamic 
state 
space mod 

proach introduces 
parametric 
state space models which 
els 
for physical 
systems [lo]. Besides 
allowing 
us 
to 

can represent 
parameters that 
physicists and engineers 
formalize the subset 
of the assumptions underlying 
a 

normally use. Physical 
system reasoners usually 
require 
mathematical 
model, it also allows 
us to formalize 
non 

a representational 
apparatus 
that deals with 
the vast 
deterministic 
actions which can possibly 
occur 
in 
a pro 

amount of physical 
knowledge 
that 
is used in reasoning 
cess being modeled, 
especially for nuclear 
physics 
reac 

tasks. There 
are two kinds 
of knowledge required. First 
tions. 
NPT 
allows 
the explicit representation 
of knowl 

is knowledge 
about 
properties 
of different types of com 
edge of nuclear 
physics interactions, 
and formalizes 
how 

340 

10430989/95$4.0001995 
IEEE 
Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications (CAIA '95) 10430989/95 $10.00 © 1995 IEEE
Knowledge 
Level 

Reaction components, 
and 

nuclear interactions. 

Symbolic 
Level 

Description of objects, 
and 

instances of Basic Nuclear 

Physics Model 
(BNPM) 
and 

Aggregates Effect 
Model 
(AEM). 

Figure 
1: Model Hierarchy 
in 
NPT 

these affect 
the structure and parameters 
of the model. 

The 
effects 
on 
the model 
are encoded 
in 
a symbolic 

structure. 
NPT 
has three 
different 
levels. 
These 
are 

shown in Fig. 
1. Each of them 
is described separately. 

2.1 
Knowledge 
level 
General descriptions of reaction components, materials and nuclear interactions are incorporated in the knowl
edge level. 
Knowledge 
describing 
the properties 
of var 

ious types 
of material 
substances is encoded 
in class 

descriptions. Knowledge on nuclear interactions is ex 

pressed by definitions 
in the basic nuclear physics model 

and the aggregate effects model. 

2.1.1 
Basic nuclear 
physics 
model 

A basic nuclear physics model consists of descriptions 
of 

the underlying nuclear 
process being modelled. 
It con 

tains 
conditions for when a process will occur, interme 

diate 
states in which 
a process will participate, 
and the 

products of a process. 
It 
is characterized 
by five fields: 

reactants, 
activity 
conditions, 
parametricequation, 
in 

termediate&ate, 
and products. 
Examples 
of such defi 

nitions are shown 
in 
Fig. 
2. 

l 
Reactants 
describe 
what 
reagents 
are being used 

in the 
reaction 
being 
modelled, and 
relations 
be 

tween 
reagents 
which 
are necessary 
for 
the reac 

tion to occur. 
In 
our 
example, 01 and 
02 
are 
the 
value:lo&+table(neutro~gmztrum(Fiwik))))
EnergyG. 
amount 
is PROBABILISTIC 
( 
gammaspectrum(Fisrile), 
defmxtor
pdjJLgamma[7](indclrEgomma,
value:lookup~abIe(gammaspeettarm(Fissile))))
EnergyJ ’l.amount 
is PROBABILISTIC 
( 

energydistributionsl(Fisaile), 

defvector 
pdjXFl[&j 
(index 
Al, 
value: 
loo~uptable(energydistributionsl(Fissik)))) 

EnergyJ ’2.amount 
ir PROBABILISTIC 
( 
(energydirtributionr2(Fihle),
def,vector
pdjJLF2[44]
(indes:
A%, u&e:
looLup~table(ene~isgydistn ’butions2(Fi&k))))
1
1
Figure
2: Basic nuclear
physics model
for fission.
341
aggregateeffectsmodel 
fission 
(bj, RC, H W, Hw){ 

material 
{ 
01 
} 

equipment 
{ 
RC is REACTOR, 

HW 
is MODERATOR, 
Hw 
is CLADDING ) 

preconditions 
{ 
RC.power 
is 
ON 
1 

activityconditions{ 
RC.juelamount 
> 0 

or Rc>O 
} 

parametricreaction 
{ 

defconst 
NA 
(uolue:6.02217eQ3,unit: ” “) 

defxonst 
o6T_deltoZ (value:20,unit: ” 
“) 

defsonst 
o&Al (value: 
72, 
unit: ” 
“) 

def_const 
o&.42 (volue: 
117, unit: ” 
“) 

defxonat 
ei (value: 
1, unit: “MeV 
“) 

defpar f 
(volue: ol.sf 
* ol.N/ 
(ol.sj * o1.N 
+ 

HW.s,o 
* Hw.N + 
HW.sa 
* Hw.N) 

defpar 
k (value: RC.eta 
* RC.epsilon * 

RC.p 
* j 
* RC.PNLj 
* RC.PNLth 
) 

defvar 
Rc 
( 
unit: 
“fissions 
“) 

defvar 
C (unit: “gr 
/ 
set ”) 

defvar 
pn 
(value: 
of.omount) 

def,vector 
distrneutr[9] 

(index:neutronssroduced) 

defvector 
distrAi[&](index:Af) 

defarray 
distr,Fl[169,109](xindex:N,yindex:Z) 

def,vector 
distr A2[45] 
(index: 
A2) 

defarray 
distrF2[169,109](xhdex:N, 
yindex:Z) 

def,vector 
distr,E,neutr[9](index:energyneut) 

def,vector 
distrEwgomma[9](index:energy~amma) 

defvector 
diatrEFl[89](index:energyJl) 

defvector 
distrEF2[89](index:energyF2) 

defarray 
nuclidesJi[l69,109](~‘ndex: 

neutrons 
per nuclide,yindex:Z) 
} 

defarray 
nuclidesJ2[169,109](~ ‘ndex: 

neutrons 
per nuclide, yindex:Z) 
} 

relations 
( 

alginfl 
((Rc) 
(k, nu, 
pn) 
(k 
/ 
nu 
* pn)} 

alginfl 
((B)(Rc, Fissile. A)(Rc 
* Fissile. A/NA)) 

alginfl 
{ (C)(Fissile.s 
j, 
Fissile.sg, B) 

(((Fisai1e.s.f 
+ Fissile.sg) 
/ol.s 
j) * B)J 

aggrinfl 
{ 
(distrneutr)(Rc) 

((Rc 
* pdjneutr[i]) 
i 
= 
0 
8 ) 
) 

aggrinfl 
{ 
(dish4 
l)(Rc) 

((Rc 
* pdjAl [i]) 
i = 
0 
44 
) 
) 

aggrinfl 
{ 
(distrA2)(Rc) 

((Rc 
* pdjA2[i]) 
i 
= 
0 
44 
) } 

aggrinfl 
{ (distrE,neutr)(pn,pdj&neutr) 

((pn 
* pdj&neut 
[i]) 
i 
= 
0 8) 
} 

cuminfl 
{ 
(pn)(distrneutr) 

( (sum(i 
* distrneutr[i])) 
i = 
0 8) ) 

aggrinfl 
{ (distrlgamma) 
(Rc) 

( 
(Rc 
* pdjEgamma 
[i/l 
i 
= 
0 8 ) } 

distrinfl{ 
(nuclidesFl)(distrA 
i,pdjdeltoZ, 

comp,nuc,f,nu)(isotopesdistribution (distr41, 

pdjdeltaZ, 
campnuc.Z, 
campnuc.A)) 
distrinfl { (nuclides_FZ)(distr42,pdj deltoZ, ..
camp,nut 
j,nu)(isotopesdistribution 

(distrJd,pdjdeltaZ, 
comp,nuc.Z, 

campnuc.A)} 

aggrinfl 
{ 
(distrEFl)(Rc) 

((Rc 
* pdjEM 
[i]) 
i 
= 
0 90) 
) 

aggrinfl { (distr_GF2)(Rc) 

((Rc 
* pdjEF2 
[i]) 
i 
= 
0 90) 
} 

products 
{ 

defabj 
Neutron 
PARTICLE 
{ 

(value 
(amount) 
: cuminfl 
{ 

(Neutron.amount) 
(pn) 
(pn) 
})} 

defobj 
EnergyNeutron 
ENERGY 
{ 

(volue(amount): 
cuminfl{ 

(EnergyNeutron.omount)(distrJbeutr) 

((sum((i 
+ 
ei/2) 
* distrLneutr[i]) 

i 
= 
0 
8) 
})} 

defabj 
EnergyGamma 
ENERGY 
{ 

(volue 
(omount): 
cuminfl{ 

(Energy~Gomma.omount)(distrE,gommo) 

((sum((i 
+ 
ei/2) 
* distr,Egammo[i]) 

i 
= 
0 
8) 
})} 

def_obj 
Fl 
PRODUCTNUCLIDES 
( 
(value: 

cuminfl 
{ 
(Fl) 
(nuclidesJ1) 

((nuclidesJl[i,j]) 
i 
= 
O 
.. 
169,j 
= 0 
.. 
108) 
})} 

defnbj 
F2 PRODUCTNUCLIDES 
( 
(value: 

cuminfl 
( 
(F2) 
(nuclidesJ1) 

((nuclidesF2[i,j]) 
i 
= 
O 
.. 
iSS,j 
= 0 
.. 
108) 
})} 

defobj 
EnergyF1 
ENERGY 
{ (volue(amount): 

cuminfl 
{ 
(EnergyFl.amount) 
(distrGFl) 

((sum((i 
+ 
ei/2) 
* distrLFl[i])) 
i 
= 
0 
.. 90)} 

defabj 
EnergyF2 
ENERGY 
((volue(omount): 

cuminfl 
{ 
(EnergyF2.omount) 
(distr_E_F2) 

((sum((i 
+ 
ei/2) 
* diskEF2[i])) 
i 
= 
0 
90)) 

Figure 
3: Aggregate 
effects 
model 
for fission. 

reagents, and their types are NUCLIDE 
and 
PAR 

TICLE. These types are encoded in classes NU 

CLIDE and PARTICLE. 01 and 02 collide. 
The reaction 
occurs when 


describe conditions 
which 
are 

necessary for processes to be active. 
Whenever 
the 

conditions 
are violated, 
the 
model 
is 
no 
longer 
an 

adequate description 
of the process. 
These condi 

tions 
depend on the state 
on the system. 
This 
field 

limits 
the values of variables. 
It specifies either 
ab 

solute limits 
on one variable, 
or limits 
relative 
to 

two variables. 


field describes 
a set 
of 
pa 
342
rameters 
which 
are necessary for a system 
being 

modelled. 

l 
Intermediatestate 
field describes actions which 

occur before the reaction generates a set of prod 

ucts. For example, the intermediatestate 
of 
a fis 

is a state where the projectile 
particle 

sion reaction and the target 
nucleus perform 
neutron 
absorption 

to create a compound nucleus. 

l 
Products 
describes 
a 
set 
of products 
generated 

as a consequence 
of 
an active 
reaction. 
The do 

scriptions 
of products 
are characterized 
by 
types 

of particles 
or nuclidea 
being 
produced 
along with 

the descriptions 
of the quantities which 
character 

ize them. 

The values of the quantities 
may be probabilistic 
or de 

terministic 
depending 
on 
the 
type 
of reaction 
itself. 
If 

the value of quantity is PROBABILISTIC, 
the 
distri 

bution 
along with its parameters 
must be defined 
in the 

model. 

2.1.2 
Aggregate 
effects 
model 

An 
aggregate 
effects model 
is used to simulate nuclear 

physics processes. 
It 
consists 
of conditions 
for when 

a simulation occurs, and the effects of this 
on 
both 
a 

state space and 
a probabilistic 
space model describing 

the process. In addition, 
can ag 

gregate a set of products 
the aggregate model as a consequence of 
an ac 

tive process. The aggregate effects model describes nu 

clear process interactions 
which incorporate dynamics, 

including 
any descriptions 
of influences which 
affect pa 

rameters of the system over time (e.g once per second). 

It is characterized 
by fields 
material, equipments, pre 

conditions, activityconditions, 
relations, and products 

such as shown in Fig.3. 

l 
Material 
field describes material being 
used in 
a 

reaction being modelled; 
it 
may be the 
same as one 

of the reactants 
in 
the basic model. 

l 
Equipment 
field specifies a place where a reaction 

is to be considered, 
along with 
its components. 

l 
Preconditions 
describe conditions which may de 

pend 
on external 
actions. Turning a power 
switch 

on 
or off 
is an example. 
No reaction occurs unless 

the power 
is turned 
on, 
but, 
once on, the power 
is 

toggled depending 
the state 
on the system. 

l 
Relations field specifies relationships to be associ ated with each instance of the definitions. The re lationships are expressed as many influences, such aa aggregate influences, cumulative influences, dis tribution influences, and parametric influences. 
l 
Products 
field 
specifies 
the 
creation 
of 
objects 

which come into being 
as 
a consequence of an ac 

tive 
aggregate 
effects 
model. 
The 
aggregate 
ef 

fects 
model 
becomes 
active 
if the 
associated ba 

sic nuclear 
physics 
model 
is active. 
This 
causes a 

set 
of new 
objects 
to 
be created 
as 
a set of 
prod 

ucts. 
are products 
which 
are 

stated These created objects in the basic nuclear 
physica model. 

The products 
field in the basic nuclear physics model 

gives the amount 
specifications 
of products 
being gener 

ated 
in a reaction. 
If the 
basic nuclear 
physics model of 

a specified reaction 
is active, the 
basic nuclear 
physics 

model generates 
a 
set 
of 
products 
symbolically, 
and 

their amounts are either PROBABILISTIC or DETER MINISTIC values. The PROBABILISTIC values are 

represented 
in 
a vector, 
while the deterministic 
values 

are represented by either integer or real values. 

A 
statement 
in 
the 
products 
field 
in the aggregate 

effects model 
does creation 
of objects 
which 
come into 

being as a consequence of the instance 
becoming 
active 

over period 
of 
time. 
Each 
attribute 
of 
the 
object 
is 

obtained by any influence specified in the field. 

2.2 
The 
Symbolic 
level 

The 
symbolic 
level 
consists of 
objects, 
relations 
and 

properties 
for these objects 
which 
are defined 
in 
the 
in 

put description such as shown in Fig. 6. The symbolic 

level 
also consists 
of objects 
representing 
instances 
of 

basic nuclear 
physics definitions 
and 
aggregate 
effects 

definitions. 

The system identifies 
every set of objects which when 

assigned to reactants 
of the basic nuclear 
physics model, 

satisfy 
the reactant 
conditions. 
The system 
also iden 

tifies every basic nuclear physics model which, when 

assigned to the aggregate effects model, 
satisfies the ag 

gregate effects model 
conditions. 
For each set of objects 

which is bound to the reactants of the basic nuclear 

physics model, 
instances 
of the 
basic 
nuclear 
physics 
model are created. Some of these instance are then
bound to the aggregate effects model which in turn in
stantiates the aggregate effects model.
For example, consider a set 
of objects 
defined in 
the 

input descriptions 
which are shown 
in Fig. 
6. These ob 

jects are considered 
to be active. The subset of instan 

tiations of these objects, U2.95 and Nedron are bound 

to reactants of the 
basic nuclear physics 
model 
of 
fis 

sion and radioactivecapture. The relation COLLIDE 

(U235, 
Neutron) matches the reactant ’s condition 
apec 

ified 
at 
the reactant 
fields 
of 
the basic nuclear 
physics 

model 
fission and 
radioactive 
caplure. This 
causes in 

stances of the basic nuclear 
physics model, 
bnpm fission 

(3235, Neutron) and bnpm radioactive caplure (U235, 
343
Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications (CAIA '95) 10430989/95 $10.00 © 1995 IEEE
11295
Neutron
RC 

HW 

HW 

BNPM fission 
(U235,Neutmn) 

BNPM mdioactive,capture 
(UZSS, Neutron) 

AEM 
(BNPMjission 
(lJ23S,Neutron),RC,HW,Hw) 

AEM 
(BNPM 
mdioactivecapture(U235, _{N}_{e}_{u}_{t}_{r}_{o}_{n}_{)}_{,}_{R}_{C}_{,} 

HW,Hw) 

Figure 4: Symbolic gregate effects model. 
instances of basic nuclear and ag 

Neutron), to 
be 
created. These instantiations along 

with 
some instantiations 
of basic objects RC, H W, Hw, 

are 
bound to 
the 
aggregate effects models of fission 

and 
radioaciiue 
caplure. This causes the instanstiation 

of 
the aggregate 
effects models,AEM (BNPM fission 

(17.995, Neuiron),RC,HW,Hw) and AEM ( BNPM 
ra 

dioadiue,capiure(lS, 
Neutron), RC, H W, Hw). 

Fig.4 shows a subset of objects which are bound 
to 

the reactants of the basic nuclear physics model which 

causes them 
to be bound to the aggregate effects models 

for a set of reactions. 
This figure also shows a subset of 
instances of the basic nuclear physics model and aggre gate effects model.
2.3 
Quantitative level 

An 
instance of the basic nuclear 
physics 
model 
and ag 

gregate effects model does not cause any analysis 
of 

the system. Only active instances 
can cause the analy 

sis. The active instances are obtained 
when the objects 

are bound to the reactants, 
the basic nuclear 
model 
is 

bound 
to the aggregate effects model, 
and objects 
sat 

isfy the preconditions and quantity 
conditions 
for both 

basic nuclear physics and aggregate effects models. 
Af 

ter 
instantiation models, the next of basic nuclear 
and aggregate 
effects 

step of reasoning 
is 
to identify 
the ac 

tive 
instances. The basic objects 
are always 
considered 

active, e.g. U2.95, Neutron, RC, H W,Hw. 
The set 
of 

active 
basic nuclear physics and aggregate effects mod 

els 
are set to follow phenomena 
reaction 
in 
the 
current 

state. 
For example, we have specified the fuel amount 
of 

reactor (RCJuelamount) is greater 
than 
0 and U235 

cro8s section fission (ol.sf) is greater 
than 
0. This 

causes only BNPM fission and AEM fission to be ac 

tive. 
Since the aggregate effects model 
describes nuclear 

interactions every neutron cycle, then 
by combining 
all 

the influences defined by these instances, the system 

generates objects describing the system state model 
ev 
ery period
of time.
Fig.
5 shows
a state
space model
and
probabilistic
space model which are generated as a consequence of
the basic nuclear physics and aggregate effects models being active.
The state space model consists of equations 
which are 

considered to consist of terms. 
Each instantiation 
of the 

basic nuclear 
physics model 
and the aggregate effects 

model comprises a set of equations which describes how 

a nuclear 
process relates 
to the underlying 
equations. 

The probabilistic 
space 
model 
consists 
of 
different 

types of distributions which govern the process. Each 

instantiation 
of the basic nuclear physics 
model and the 

aggregate effects model comprises 
a 
set 
of 
parameters 

which is considered to have nondeterministic values, 

along with 
their 
probabilistic 
distributions. 
These 
dis 

tributions 
constitute a sufficient conceptual 
basis for ob 

taining nondeterministic modeled. 
values from 
the process being 

For example, the number of neutrons produced for 

each fission 
is nondeterministic; it ranges between 0 to 

8. The probability 
of producing 0  
8 neutrons 
for each 

fission is controlled 
by the 
Poisson 
distribution. 
This 

distribution 
is represented as pa ”,neutr 
(see Fig. 
5). 

The distribution 
of neutrons 
produced 
for fissions is de 

pendent 
on 
the 
rate of reaction Rc and the pdf,neutr. 

The 
distribution 
of neutron 
products 
is represented 
by 

distraeutr. 
If 
the state 
of the 
system 
changes 
Rc, 

the distribution change as well. 
of product 
neutrons, 
dishneutr, will 

The 
state space model 
described 
above 
are formal 

ized 
by 
all 
influences of 
all 
instantiated 
of 
the active 

processes. 
In general, influences express 
how 
one or 
a 

set of variables influence another 
variable 
or 
another 

set of variables. 
There are several types of influences 
in 

NPT. 
Two 
of them, dynamic 
and algebraic 
influences, 

are similar 
to 
HPT 
influences. Their 
syntax specifica 

tions are described in [8,9, 
lo]. Other 
influences, 
unique 

to NPT, are described in [5]. 

3 
Example 

This 
section 
illustrates 
how NPT works. 
Nuclear 
re 

actions 
under 
consideration 
are fission reactions. The 

basic nuclear 
physics model 
and the 
aggregate 
effects 

model definitions 
are given 
in Fig. 
2 
and 
Fig. 
3. The 

input 
descriptions 
for NPT 
program 
are shown in Fig.6. 

Assuming 
that 
all relevant 
basic nuclear 
physics and 

aggregate effects models 
are 
included 
in 
the 
system, 

NPT 
will 
identify 
all possible instantiations 
of the basic 

nuclear physics and aggregate effects models. 
This task 
is accomplished when a set of existing objects match
344
Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications (CAIA '95) 10430989/95 $10.00 © 1995 IEEE
PRODUCT,NUCLIDES F2
Fl.omount = isotopesdistribution (distr42,
pdjdeltoZ, comp,nuc.Z, wmp,nuc.A)
ENERGY 
EnergyNeutron 

EnerggJeutron.omount 
= 

(sum((i+ei/2) * dirtrE,neutr[i]))i=0 8 .. 

ENERGY 
Energy,Gommo 

EnergkGommo.omount 
= 

(sum((i+ei/2) * diskEgammo[i]))i=0 8 .. 

ENERGY 
Energy& 

EnergrQi.omount 
= 

(aum((i+ei/2) * diskEFl[i]))i=0 90 .. 

ENERGY 
EnergyF2 

EnergQ’2,omount 
= 

(sum((i+ei/2) * distrGF2[i])i=0 90 .. 

Figure 
5: 
State 
space 
model 
and 
probabilistic 
space 

model 
of 
NPT. 
345
U235 NUCLIDE 
( 

Z 
92 

A 
295 

N 
lOe21/* 
otdms per cm3 
*/ 

omount 
100 /* 
gr 
*/ 

_{*}_{J} 
585 /* 
born 
*/ 

_{*}_{}_{9} 
99 
/* 
km 
*/ 

1 

Neutron 
PARTICLE 
{ 

Z 
0 

A 
1 

omount 
Se20 

1 

HW 
MODERATOR 
( 

_{s}_{}_{0} 
0.883 /* 
barn */ 

N 
3.679e22 
/* atoms per 
cm3 
*/ 

1 

Hw 
CLADDING 
( 

LO 
0.66 /* 
ban */ 

Ncl 
2.013e23 
/* atoms per 
cm3 
*/ 

1 

RC REACTOR 
( 

corn 
homogeneous 

epsilon 
2.22 /* 
thermal jkion 
factor 
*/ 

eta 
1.115 /*fast 
fission factor 
*/ 

0.667 /* 
nsononce erwpe 
probability 
*/ 

Fuel 
U235 

PNLth 
0.833 

PNLf 
0.865 

1 

COLLIDE 
(U235, 
Neutron) 

Figure 
6: 
An 
example 
of input descriptions 
for 
NPT. 

the requirements 
for the 
reactants and the material 
as 

stated 
in the basic nuclear 
physics and aggregate 
effects 

models. 

The 
instantiation 
of a number of reaction 
definitions 

are considered as conceivable nuclear reactions. 
These 

may cause the generation of a set of products described 

symbolically. 
The 
instances of objects, 
basic nuclear 

physics and aggregate 
effects models of a fission reaction 

are shown symbolically 
similar to Fig. 
4. 

When all possible nuclear 
reactions 
have been cre 

ated, 
the 
program 
proceeds to test the 
validity 
of 
the 

activity 
conditions 
for each instance. This 
requires 
that 

the initial 
values for at 
least 
a subset 
of parameters 
and 

variables have been specified. The 
result 
of this 
pro 

cess is 
a set of 
active processes, which 
is a subset 
of 
the 
conceivable nuclear 
reactions. 
The 
instantiations 
of 
ac 

tive processes will 
generate 
a set 
of products which 
is 

expressed either 
in deterministic values or probabilistic 

values. The state space and probabilistic 
models always fol 

low directly 
from 
the set of active 
processes. These are 

the consequences of a number 
of influences defined by 

these instances. 
If the complete initial state is known, 
then both state space and probabilistic models can be
used to determine the behavior of the system. An ex
ample with
input shown in Fig. 6, along with the results
of running 
a simulation 
after 10 seconds 
is discussed in 

[5]. These results include 
distribution of neutron 
prod 

ucts, distribution 
of energy of neutron products, energy 

of gamma products, distribution of mass number 
of 
fis 

sion fragments 
for light 
nuclei (Al), and heavy 
nuclei 

(A2), 
the distribution 
of fission fragments 
for light 
nu 

clei 
(Fl), and heavy nuclei 
(F2) along with 
the distri 

bution 
of isotopes, the energy of fission fragments, 
and 

total energy produced by fissions. 

4 
Concluding 
remarks 

This paper 
describes 
a formal knowledge represen 

tation 
for nuclear 
physics 
processes, called 
NPT 
(Nu 

clear Processs Theory). 
A simple nuclear 
process simu 

lator based on NPT has been developed. The introduc 

tion of cummulative, 
aggregate and parametric 
influ 

ences should be useful in other domains where reason 

ing about complex 
physical 
processes is required. 
Prob 

abilistic representation 
of processes is also unique 
to 

NPT, and may prove useful in reasoning about other 

processes requiring nondeterministic models (e.g qual 

ity control). 
It 
remains 
to implement a complete 
set 
of 
computerbased tools which can perform a simulation based on NPT models. The real challenges ahead lies
in developing a set of basic nuclear physics and aggre
gate effects models which are as universal as possible. 

Acknowledgements 

The authors would like to thank 
Dr. George DeMille 

of 
the UNB 
Department of Physics for his suggestions. 

This 
research is partly funded 
by the Higher Education 

Development 
Project 
of the Republic 
of Indonesia, 
and 

by 
the UNB 
Faculty 
of Computer Science. 

References 

[l] 
Bhaskar, 
R. 
and Nigam, 
A. “Qualitative Physics 
Using Dimensional Analysis ”, 
Artificial 
Intelli 

gence vol.45, 
1990, pp.73111. 

deKleer, 
J.D 
and 
Brown, 
J.S. 
“A qualitative 

physics based 
on 
confluences ”, 
Artificial 
Intelli 

gence, 
~01.24, 1984, pp.783. 

Forbus, Kenneth 
D. The Qualitative 
Process The 

ory, Ph.D Thesis, Department of Computer Sci 

ence, Massachusetts Institute 
of Technology, 1984. 

Hartati, S. 
“Reasoning about 
Physical Systems 

in Artificial 
Intelligence ”, _{T}_{e}_{c}_{h}_{n}_{i}_{c}_{a}_{l} 
_{R}_{e}_{p}_{o}_{r}_{t} 
_{T}_{R}_{9}_{3}_{} 

080, 
Faculty 
of 
Computer Science, 
University 
of 

New Brunswick, 
1993. 

Hartati, S. 
“Nuclear 
Process 
Theory: 
A Sym 

bolic 
Model 
for Representing 
Nuclear 
Physics Pro 

ceases ”, Technical 
Report TR94087, 
Faculty 
of 

Computer 
Science, University 
of New Brunswick, 

October, 
1994. 

Kuipers, 
B. 
“Commonsense 
reasoning 
about 

causality: 
deriving 
behavior 
structure ”, 
Arlificial 

Intelligence, 
~01.24, 1984, pp.169203. 

Kuipers, B. “Qualitative Simulation ”, Artificial 
In 

telligence, 
vol.29, 
pp.289388, 
1986. 

Woods, E. 
“The 
Hybrid Phenomena 
Theory ”, Pro 

ceedings of 
the 
Twelfth 
International 
Conference 
on 

Artificial 
Intelligence, 
Sydney, 
Australia, 
Aug 
24 

30, 1991, pp.11381142. 

Woods, E. and Balchen, J.G. 
“Structural 
Estima 

tion 
with the hybrid 
phenomena 
theory ”, 
_{P}_{r}_{o}_{c}_{e}_{e}_{d}_{} 

ings of the 
3rd 
IFAC 
Workshop, 
California, 
USA, 

September 
2325, 
1991, pp.127132. 

_{W}_{o}_{o}_{d}_{s}_{,} E.The 
Hybrid Phenomena 
Theory 
A 

Framework 
Integrating Structural 
Descriptions 

with 
State 
Space 
Modeling and 
Simulation, 
_{P}_{h}_{.}_{D} 

Thesis, Division 
of Engineering 
Cybernetics, 
Nor 

wegian Institute 
of Technology, 
Trondheim, 
Nor 

way, 1993. 
PI
[31
PI
PI
El
171
PI
PI
_{[}_{l}_{o}_{]}
346
Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications (CAIA '95) 10430989/95 $10.00 © 1995 IEEE