ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Meeting Spotlight
Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
September 8–11, 2025
Atlanta, GA|Atlanta Marriott Marquis
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Jun 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
August 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
July 2025
Latest News
The U.S. Million Person Study of Low-Dose-Rate Health Effects
There is a critical knowledge gap regarding the health consequences of exposure to radiation received gradually over time. While there is a plethora of studies on the risks of adverse outcomes from both acute and high-dose exposures, including the landmark study of atomic bomb survivors, these are not characteristic of the chronic exposure to low-dose radiation encountered in occupational and public settings. In addition, smaller cohorts have limited numbers leading to reduced statistical power.
Diego Mandelli, Andrea Alfonsi, Congjian Wang, Zhegang Ma, Carlo Parisi, Tunc Aldemir, Curtis Smith, Robert Youngblood
Nuclear Technology | Volume 207 | Number 3 | March 2021 | Pages 363-375
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2020.1776030
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A new generation of dynamic methods has started receiving attention for nuclear reactor probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). These methods, which are commonly referred to as dynamic PRA (DPRA) methodologies, directly employ system simulators to evaluate the impact of timing and sequencing of events (e.g., failure of components) on accident progression. Compared to classical PRA (CPRA) methods, which are based on static Boolean logic structures such as fault trees and event trees (ETs), DPRA methods can provide valuable insights from an accident management perspective. However, as of today this class of methods has received limited attention in practical applications. One factor is DPRA research and development has progressed mostly as an alternative to state-of-practice CPRA methods (i.e., disconnected from currently employed PRA methods). This disconnect is addressed in this paper by presenting several algorithms that can be employed to bridge the gap between CPRA and DPRA. First, algorithms designed to identify differences between CPRA and DPRA results are presented. The identification process compares the CPRA ET sequence or the minimal cut sets (MCSs) obtained by CPRA with the set of transients simulated by the DPRA. If inconsistencies are observed, solutions are provided to incorporate these differences back into the CPRA by employing DPRA to inform existing CPRA. We performed this incorporation either probabilistically (e.g., by updating MCS probability) or topologically (by adding new branching conditions or sequences in the ET).