Evaluation of Quantification of Margins and Uncertainties Methodology for Assessing and Certifying the Reliability of the Nuclear Stockpile (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Comparison and Contrast of the Use of QMU
4 Comparison and Contrast of the Use of QMU
Pages 39-42
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 39... ...
Earlier reports raised concerns that differences in the implementation of QMU among the three national security laboratories (both among the labs and among various groups within a single lab) could cause confusion and limit the efficacy of QMU as a framework for assessing and communicating the reliability of nuclear weapons.
|
From page 40... ...
Differences in definitions among the national security labs of some QMU terms cause confusion and limit transparency. Table 4-1 shows that, in some cases, earlier concerns about inconsistencies continue to be valid.
|
From page 41... ...
To enhance transparency in communicat ing the results arising from the QMU analyses, national security laboratories should agree on a common set of definitions -- such as the sigma level designating the magnitude of uncertainty -- and terminology. Inconsistencies in the definition of uncertainty and common terms such as Yp,min (minimum primary yield)
|
From page 42... ...
The QMU framework has yet to be clearly defined by the national security laboratories collectively or individually. This framework must identify a more comprehensive set of performance gates and describe how QMU is used to analyze each.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.