Status, Challenges, and Plans for Consistent Modeling and Evaluation of Fission Data: Nubar, PFNS, and FPY [Slides]
This presentation discusses the importance of consistent evaluations for fission observables. Currently, prompt fission quantities (e.g., neutron multiplicity, neutron energy spectrum, and fission product yields) are evaluated independently of one another, either with separate models or data-only/non-model evaluations (few – if any – shared model inputs) and inconsistencies can arise in evaluated data (e.g. NSE 190, 258 (2018)). They have found that consistent, model-based evaluations lead to more physical constraints on free parameters in the model, more robust predictions for other observables and other isotopes, that there are correlations between the uncertainties on different observables, and that uncertainties can be propagated to unmeasured quantities. They are working on developing models to the point where fission observables are calculated at the quality needed for an evaluation. They are striving to consistently calculate fission observables, such as $\bar{v}$, PFNS, and FPY, to a quality suitable for an evaluation. Current evaluations for fission observables use separate models for each observable (with minimal shared input) or are purely data driven. LANL models, such as the Monte Carlo CGMF and deterministic BeoH, have different strengths; the similar fission fragment initial conditions and decay models leads to consistency between the two codes (FPY can be connected to $\bar{v}$ and PFNS, even when calculated by different codes). Work is underway by Lovell to optimize the models and Neudecker is working to perform detailed uncertainty quantification. The PFNS, in particular, presents a significant challenge.