Current nuclear data needs for applications

Accurate nuclear data provide an essential foundation for advances in a wide range of fields, including nuclear energy, nuclear safety and security, safeguards, nuclear medicine, and planetary and space exploration. In these and other critical domains, outdated, imprecise, and incomplete nuclear data can hinder progress, limit precision, and compromise safety. Similar nuclear data needs are shared by many applications, thus prioritizing these needs is especially important and urgently needed. Many levels of analysis are required to prepare nuclear measurements for employment in end-user applications. Because research expertise is typically limited to one level, collaboration across organizations and international borders is essential. This perspective piece provides the latest advances in nuclear data for applications and describes an outlook for both near- and long-term progress in the field.

Figure 1

Schematic example of a linear data pipeline showing how the components of the pipeline contribute to the production of data libraries used by applications. Given the multidisciplinary nature of nuclear data, some activities may involve more than one component.

Figure 2

An example from the Collaborative International Evaluation Library Organization (CIELO) project which shows validation using ICSBEP criticality benchmarks. This shows that, overall, ENDF/B-VIII.0 nuclear data performs better than ENDF/B-VII.1 for ICSBEP benchmarks. (From Ref. [133].)

Figure 3

Example setup of a time-of-flight neutron scattering experiment using organic scintillators at the RPI LINAC. (From Ref. [148].)

Figure 4

Example setup of a PNDA experiment. (From Ref. [152].)

Figure 5

An example of subcritical neutron noise measurements utilizing both ${}^3\mathrm{He}$ and organic scintillator detectors measuring a sphere of Pu. (Modified from Ref. [176].)

Figure 6

The VENUS-F Zero Power Reactor, which was used to generate benchmark data for the design of the MYRRHA accelerator-driven system. (From Ref. [181].)

Figure 7

Predicted dose equivalent rates from neutrons and ions behind varying thicknesses of aluminum using several transport models: fluka (green), geant4-qmd (dashed red), geant4-inclxx (red), mcnp6 (pink), phits (blue), and 3dhzetrn with $N=1$, 3, and 34 (black). The percentage presented corresponds to relative variations in the model results. (From Ref. [203].)

Figure 8

Schematic of cosmic ray interactions with planetary surfaces. (Rendering by Veronica Chen [225].)

Figure 9

Illustration of a conceptual fission surface power system on the Moon which may potentially be used for the upcoming Artemis Mission. (From Ref. [236].)

Figure 10

Energy deposition from a 50 kt yield neutron source visualized in a 80 cm ${\mathrm{SiO}}_2$ asteroid using mcnp. The color scale corresponds to the number of factors above the melt threshold the asteroid was heated. Dark blue indicates the material was unmelted. (From Ref. [241].)

Figure 11

Neutron cross sections in ${}^{28}\mathrm{Si}$ for reactions ocurring an energies below 15 MeV. (From Ref. [244].) Curves are taken from Ref. [132].

Figure 12

KP-FHR coolant temperature reactivity coefficient isolines for different C/HM ratios. (From Ref. [253].)

Figure 13

Uncertainty analysis for signatures used in nondestructive assay of MSRs. (From Ref. [254].)