Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Nuclear Engineering and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/nucengdes

Optimization of the core conguration design using a hybrid articial intelligence algorithm for research reactors
Afshin Hedayat a,c, , Hadi Davilu a , Ahmad Abdollahzadeh Barfrosh b , Kamran Sepanloo c
a b c

Department of Nuclear Engineering and Physics, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), 424 Hafez Avenue, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran Department of Computer Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), 424 Hafez Avenue, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran Reactor Research and Development School, Nuclear Science and Technology Research Institute (NSTRI), End of North Karegar Street, P.O. Box 14395-836, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
To successfully carry out material irradiation experiments and radioisotope productions, a high thermal neutron ux at irradiation box over a desired life time of a core conguration is needed. On the other hand, reactor safety and operational constraints must be preserved during core conguration selection. Two main objectives and two safety and operational constraints are suggested to optimize reactor core conguration design. Suggested parameters and conditions are considered as two separate tness functions composed of two main objectives and two penalty functions. This is a constrained and combinatorial type of a multi-objective optimization problem. In this paper, a fast and effective hybrid articial intelligence algorithm is introduced and developed to reach a Pareto optimal set. The hybrid algorithm is composed of a fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm (GA) and a fast tness function evaluating system based on the cascade feed forward articial neural networks (ANNs). A specic GA representation of core conguration and also special GA operators are introduced and used to overcome the combinatorial constraints of this optimization problem. A software package (Core Pattern Calculator 1) is developed to prepare and reform required data for ANNs training and also to revise the optimization results. Some practical test parameters and conditions are suggested to adjust main parameters of the hybrid algorithm. Results show that introduced ANNs can be trained and estimate selected core parameters of a research reactor very quickly. It improves effectively optimization process. Final optimization results show that a uniform and dense diversity of Pareto fronts are gained over a wide range of tness function values. To take a more careful selection of Pareto optimal solutions, a revision system is introduced and used. The revision of gained Pareto optimal set is performed by using developed software package. Also some secondary operational and safety terms are suggested to help for nal trade-off. Results show that the selected benchmark case study is dominated by gained Pareto fronts according to the main objectives while safety and operational constraints are preserved. 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 18 April 2009 Received in revised form 5 August 2009 Accepted 23 August 2009

1. Introduction Research reactors are used for material researches and radioisotope productions, performing neutron radiography, semiconductor doping and neutron activation analysis, education and training, and also extracting a wide range of neutron beam spectrum (IAEA Technical Report, 2007). The optimization of the core design is necessary to use effectively of research reactor utilizations. Some specic devices are developed and being operated presently (IAEA Technical Report, 2007). But also on the other hand, an appropriate cal-

Corresponding author at: Department of the Nuclear Engineering and Physics, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), 424 Hafez Avenue, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran. E-mail addresses: ahedayat@aut.ac.ir, Af.Hedayat@yahoo.com (A. Hedayat). 0029-5493/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.nucengdes.2009.08.027

culation method is needed to optimize core conguration design. Although each of the specic radioisotope productions or material irradiation tests in a research reactor needs to some specic utilization conditions, generally to successfully carry out material irradiation experiments and radioisotope productions, a high value of thermal neutron ux at irradiation boxes over a desired life time of a core conguration is needed. These criteria are independent and conict with each other. On the other hand, reactor safety and operational constraints must be preserved during core conguration selection. Safety and operational constraints can be obtained from safety analysis studies (Hamidouche et al., 2003; Hedayat et al., 2007; IAEA Technical Document, 1992; Woodruff, 1984). In this paper, two main objectives and two safety and operational constraints are suggested to optimize reactor core conguration design. The suggested optimization criteria and also safety and operational constraints are separately dependent on the

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

2787

Nomenclature cd D fc fk fp Fi F(x) Flux Flux0 g(x) i, j k K Kout0 n nc N Pt PPF Qt Rt S t crowding distance normalized distance crossover fraction values of the kth objective function (tness function) Pareto front fraction non-dominated fronts objective function, tness function thermal neutron ux density (at the irradiation box) constant value inequality constraint counting number objective index number of objectives constant value counting number number of generation dened for convergence criteria number of solutions, population size population at tth generation power peaking factor (radial) offspring population at tth generation combined population at tth generation feasible area in decision space, spread function generation index, time index dened convergence limit for the average change of spread values a solution objective value, tness value feasible area in the criterion space

vc
x, y z Z

Greek letters reactor reactivity neutron ux densities Subscripts eff effective E Euclidean distance i, j counting number in control rod absorbers are completely in the core k kth objective function, kth tness value max maximum out control rod absorbers are completely out of the core rank rank of a individual in the population t total tth generation th thermal Superscripts min minimum max maximum

core conguration design. This is a constrained and combinatorial type of a multi-objective optimization problem. Genetic algorithms (GA) are a popular meta-heuristic method that is particularly well-suited for this class of problems (Konak et al., 2006). Traditional genetic algorithms (Holland, 1975) are customized to accommodate multi-objective problems by using specialized tness functions and introducing methods to promote solution diversity. There are two general approaches to solve a multi-objective optimization. One is combining the individual objective functions into a single composite function by using weighted-sum approach

(Zadeh, 1963) or moving all but one objective to the constraint set. The second general approach is determination of an entire Pareto optimal solution set (Censor, 1977; Cunha and Polak, 1967) or a representative subset. A Pareto optimal set is a set of solutions that are non-dominated with respect to each other. Pareto optimal solution sets are often preferred to single solutions because they can be practical when considering real-life problems since the nal solution of the decision-maker is always a trade-off (Konak et al., 2006). The rst approach needs additional procedure to adjust combination weights for each desired conditions. On the other hand, the second approach results a Pareto optimal set providing different conditions. Then research reactor operators can expertly select compatible core conguration. In this paper the second approach, determination of an entire Pareto optimal solution set is used to solve this multi-objective optimization problem. A fast and effective hybrid articial intelligence algorithm is introduced and developed to reach a Pareto optimal set. This algorithm is composed of a fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm (Deb et al., 2002) and a fast tness function evaluating system based on the cascade feed forward ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). The core of the IAEA 10 MW LEU benchmark problem (IAEA Technical Document, 1980) is used to introduce and test suggested optimization method for the core conguration design of a research reactor. Although according to performed tests (Jones et al., 2002), GA are the most popular heuristic approach to multi-objective design and optimization problems, but getting desired results from population-based methods like GA usually needs many large computations. On the other hand, to obtain objective function values in each epoch, safety and neutron core parameters must be calculated repeatedly. The best method to calculate accurately these parameters is solving diffusion equation by core calculation codes such as CITATION (Fowler et al., 1971). These codes solve the diffusion equation by numerical methods. A combination of iterative numerical methods and evolutionary process steps increases the total time of the optimization process. The very large time of computation process can restrict the effective using of these methods. The rst step to use a multi-objective genetic algorithm for the core conguration design effectively, is replacing a new method to approximate the tness function values during optimization process. This method should be effectively faster than iterative numerical methods. Feed forward neural networks are a well known fast predictor in nuclear industry (Kim et al., 1993; Mazrou and Hamadouche, 2004; Hedayat et al., 2009). In this research, a fast estimation system of tness function parameters is introduced and developed by using cascade feed forward ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). A wide variety of completely different core arrangements are needed to train and test developed ANNs. Needed parameters should be extracted from diffusion theory calculations. They must be converted to a compatible format to feed used ANNs. Doing this manually takes a long time while some human errors are possible. On the other hand, to take a more careful selection of Pareto optimal solutions, a revision system based on diffusion theory calculation is needed. In this research, a software package (Core Pattern Calculator 1) is developed and used to prepare and reform required data for ANNs training and validation, and also to revise the optimization results. Some practical test parameters and conditions are suggested to adjust main parameters of the hybrid algorithm. A specic GA representation according to core conguration design and also special GA operators are developed to overcome the combinatorial constraints. Final optimization results show that a uniform and dense

2788

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

spread out of Pareto fronts are gained over a wide range of tness functions values. In order to take, a more careful selection of Pareto front, they are revised by the developed software; and also some operational and safety terms are suggested to take a more effective irradiation and higher safety margins of selected Pareto optimal solutions during nal trade-off as a ne tuning method. 2. Multi-objective optimization Some optimization problems may formulate with more than one objective, since a single-objective with several constraints may not adequately represent the problem being faced. If so, there is a vector of objectives (Eq. (1)) that must be traded off in some way. F (x) = F1 (x) , F2 (x) , ..., Fm (x) (1)

dominated solutions in decision space (S) is referred to as the Pareto optimal set, and for a given Pareto optimal set, the corresponding objective function values in the objective space or criterion space (Z) are called the Pareto fronts. The ultimate goal of a multi-objective optimization algorithm is to identify solutions in the Pareto optimal set. However, identifying the entire Pareto optimal set, for many multi-objective problems, is practically impossible due to its size. In addition, for many problems, especially for combinatorial optimization problems, proof of solution optimality is computationally infeasible. Therefore, a practical approach to multi-objective optimization is to investigate a set of solutions (the best-known Pareto set) that represent the Pareto optimal set as well as possible. With these concerns in mind, a multi-objective optimization approach should achieve the following three conicting goals (Zitzler et al., 2000): The best-known Pareto front should be as close as possible to the true Pareto front. Ideally, the best-known Pareto set should be a subset of the Pareto optimal set. Solutions in the best-known Pareto optimal set should be uniformly distributed and diverse over of the Pareto fronts in order to provide the decision-maker a true picture of trade-offs. The best-known Pareto front should capture the whole spectrum of the Pareto front. This requires investigating solutions at the extreme ends of the objective function space (criterion space). For a given computational time limit, the rst goal is best served by focusing the search on a particular region of the Pareto fronts. On the contrary, the second goal demands the search effort to be uniformly distributed over the Pareto fronts. The third goal aims at extending of the Pareto fronts at both ends, exploring new extreme solutions (Konak et al., 2006). 3. Multi-criteria consideration for research reactor core conguration designs The most effective way to increase utilization of a research reactor is placement optimization of fuel assemblies in the core to maximize neutron ux densities in the reactor channels used for neutron physics researches, radioisotope productions and neutron transmutation doping of silicon (Mahlers, 1997). On the other hand, a designed core conguration must have the longest possible life time while the safety issues are kept. This is a constrained and combinatorial type of a multi-objective problem. The most important choice as the rst optimization objective is the maximization of the thermal neutron ux densities in the desired ux trap; and the second is the maximization of the core conguration life time. It is possible if Keff-out , effective multiplication factor when the control rod absorbers are completely out of the core, is maximized. Two safety and operational conditions are selected to operate reactor safely. The radial power peaking factor (PPF) of each optimized conguration must preserve safety limits; also control fuel assemblies must be capable to shutdown reactor safely. These constraints can be different for each type of research reactors. Two other secondary conditions are suggested to help for a ne tuning study during nal trade-off. 4. Based case study In this study, in order to validate the reactor physic calculations used to generate needed data, the IAEA benchmark problem (IAEA Technical Document, 1980) is chosen. Considered limits (Section 3) were not dened for the main benchmark problem directly (IAEA Technical Document, 1980). So two typical values are chosen to

The relative importance of these objectives is not generally known until the systems best capabilities are determined and trade-offs between the objectives fully understood. As the number of objectives increases, trade-offs are likely to become complex and less easily quantied. Thus, requirements for a multi-objective design strategy must enable a natural problem formulation to be expressed, and be able to solve the problem and enter preferences into a realistic design problem. A multi-objective optimization problem can be represented formally as follows: Min {z1 = f1 (x), z2 = f2 (x), . . . , zq = fq (x)} (2)

s.t. gi f(x) an objective function, and gi (x) inequality constraint functions which form an area of feasible solutions. The feasible area in decision space is noted by the set S (Eq. (3)), as follows: S= xRn |gi (x) 0, i = 1, 2, . . . , m (3)

x 0. i = 1, 2,. . ., mwhere xRn is a vector of n decision variables,

The multi-objective optimization problem can be shown in both of decision space and criterion space (Gen and Cheng, 1999). S (Eq. (3)) is used to denote the feasible region in the decision space and Z (Eq. (4)) is used to denote the feasible region in the criterion space. Z= zRq |z1 = f1 (x) , z2 = f2 (x) , . . . , zq = fq (x) , xS (4)

where zRq is a vector of values of q objective functions. In the other word, Z is the set of images of all points in S; and S is conned to the Rn . Note that because f(x) is a vector, if any of the components of f(x) are competing, there is no unique solution to this problem. Instead, the concept of non-inferiority (Zadeh, 1963) that also called Pareto optimality (Censor, 1977; Cunha and Polak, 1967) must be used to characterize the objectives. A non-inferior solution is one in which an improvement in one objective requires a degradation of another. In the case of multiple objectives, there does not necessarily exist a solution that is best with respect to all objectives. Because of incommensurability and coniction among objectives, a solution may be best in one objective but worst in another. Therefore, there usually exist a set of solutions for the multi-objective case which cannot simply be compared with each others. For such solutions, called non-dominated solutions or Pareto optimal solutions, no improvement is possible in any objective function without sacricing at least one of another objective functions. For a given point zo Z, it is a non-dominated solution if and only if there does not exist another point zZ such that for the minimization case: zk <
o zk

for some k{1, 2, 3, . . . , q}

(5)

/ zl = zlo for all l = k A solution is said to be Pareto optimal if it is not dominated by any other solution in the solution space. The set of all feasible non-

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799 Table 1 Main benchmark problem operating conditions (IAEA Technical Document, 1980). Core material Nuclear fuel Fuel element Coolant Moderator Reector Fuel specications Fuel material Fuel enrichment

2789

MTR Plate-type clad in Al Light water (downward forced ow) Light water Graphite-light water UAlX Al 20 w/o U-235 390 g U-235 per fuel element (23/17 plates) 72 w/o of uranium in the UAlX Al only U-235 and U-238 in the fresh fuel Homogeneous Xenon content corresponding to average-power-density 8.00 7.60 60.0 23/17 0.51 6.30/6.65 60.0 2.23 0.38 20 20 1.7

Xenon-state

Fuel element dimensions Length (cm) Width (cm) Height (cm) Number of plates SFE/CFE Fuel plate dimensions Plate meat (mm) Width (cm) active/total Height (cm) Water channel between plates (mm) Plate clad thickness (mm) Core thermal hydraulics Water temperature ( C) Fuel temperature ( C) Pressure at core height (bar)

solve and test optimization algorithm. The PPF must lower be than 1.9 (Mazrou and Hamadouche, 2006); and Keff-in , the effective multiplication factor when the control rod absorbers are completely in the core, must be lower than 1 for capability of the reactor shutdown. The core of the IAEA 10 MW LEU benchmark research reactor (Table 1) has an arrangement of 5 6 elements containing 21 standard MTR-type fuel elements (SFE) of 23 plates each and four control fuel elements (CFE) with 17 plates. Eight boxes of graphite reector (G) are located on both sides of the core. The core is surrounded by water (W) and one ux trap is located in the center of the core. (Fig. 1) Burn up effects are considered using cell calculations according to primary denitions of selected benchmark case study. The WIMSD5 (MTR PC V3.0 user manual, 2006) code is used to generate the cross sections as a function of fuel burn ups. After condensation and homogenization of macroscopic cross sections and scattering matrixes by POS WIMS program (POS WIMS V2.5 user manual, 2006), the macroscopic cross section handler (HXS) program (HXS V4.1 user manual, 2006) is used to handle macroscopic cross sections in library form (Hedayat et al., 2009). The three-dimensional and three group diffusion calculation is performed with the CITVAP V3.2 code (CITVAP V3.2 user manual, 2006). According to core calculation studies performed by CITVAP V3.2 code (CITVAP V3.2 user manual, 2006) in this research, the maximum thermal neutron ux densities are extracted from the water channels (core positions labeled by W in Fig. 1). In order to obtain a sufciently large search space for the best neutron ux trap (main irradiation box), a slight modication is introduced in the initial core arrangement (Fig. 1). The four water channels (W) surrounded the fuel assemblies at edges, can be located between fuel assem-

Fig. 1. IAEA 10 MW benchmark (LEU) BOC core.

blies. Each of them can have the maximum thermal neutron ux densities as the primary central ux trap. Then the ve water channels are replaced by ve exible irradiation boxes (I.B.) to get the best location of nal ux trap (main irradiation box). The referenced absorber material, pure aluminum, in the primary benchmark problem (IAEA Technical Document, 1980) has too small absorption cross section to simulate realistic control rod materials. So to have a more effective and realistic control rod study while the primary denitions for the benchmark problem (IAEA Technical Document, 1980) is kept, the (1/V) absorber type is selected as the material absorber for the control rods in cell calculations. But it still has too small neutron absorption cross section to consider a operational shutdown margin as a constraint. To consider a large shutdown margin for a research reactor a more realistic composite of absorber materials with large neutron absorption cross sections such as Ag, In, Cd is needed. Also during reactor operational tasks, the total reactivity of the fuel assemblies will be reduced; and some reactor poisons such as, Xenon and Sumarium will be produced. So reactor shutdown margin will be increased inherently safe during reactor operation. In this paper, the two reector rows are considered xed and 30 remaining positions are selected to introduce and test the optimization algorithm. 5. Develop a software package to prepare required data for ANNs training and revise the optimization results A wide variety of completely different core arrangements are needed to train effectively used ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). There is a main difference between nuclear research reactors and nuclear

2790

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

Fig. 2. The GUI of the Core Pattern Calculator 1.

power reactors. Research reactor assemblies can have a wide variety of fuel burn ups during their life time. Then to get real simulations using ANNs, and also to decrease required training data sets, they should be provided separately for each of BOC states. It can be performed according to respective core components including deferent batch types of standard fuel assemblies, control fuel assemblies, and irradiation channels. Needed parameters should be extracted from diffusion theory calculations. They must be converted to a compatible format to feed used ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). Doing this manually takes a long time while some human errors are possible. Respective calculations of Pareto front revisions must be automatic and accurate too.

In this research, a software package (Core Pattern Calculator 1) is developed and used. Core Pattern Calculator 1 is programmed by using Borland Delphi 2006. The random state of the software is used to create data sets necessary to train and test used ANNs; and also the recalculation state of it is used to revise the optimization results. Fig. 2 shows GUI of the Core Pattern Calculator 1. An integer type of coding algorithm is selected to represent each core pattern. This representation is compatible with combinatorial optimizations too. Many strings composed of specic integer numbers are chosen randomly to form different core congurations. For each different state, Core Pattern Calculator 1 software uses CITVAP V3.2 code (CITVAP V3.2 user manual, 2006) to extract

Fig. 3. The main diagram of creating desired data.

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799 Table 2 Final learning and prediction properties of used ANNs. Final ANNs parameters Number of training data sets Number of testing data sets Learning rate Momentum coefcient Number of epochs Estimated time for training Average relative prediction error Maximum relative prediction error Simulation time for 200 core congurations Keff-out 500 200 0.025 0.86 250 25 s 0.006 0.023 0.033 s Keff-in 500 200 0.025 0.86 252 26 s 0.027 0.098 0.029 s PPF 500 200 0.025 0.86 227 25 s 0.0510 0.233 0.027 s

2791

th-max 500 200 0.025 0.86 228 28 s 0.1063 0.506 0.034 s

needed core parameters. During calculation process, CITVAP V3.2 code uses macroscopic cross sections library provided by HXS V4.1 program (HXS V4.1 user manual, 2006). Then extracted parameters are stored on a local data base table. Borland Data Base Engine (BDE) was used to store and read data from the local data base. Fig. 3 shows the main diagram of creating desired data. 6. Evaluate the tness functions using cascade feed forward ANNs If tness functions can be estimated in very short time, GA (Holland, 1975) can be effectively used for presented type optimization. In this research, a very fast estimation system for suggested core parameters is developed by using cascade feed forward ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). The gradient descent method with momentum weight/bias learning rule algorithm (Rumelhart et al., 1986a,b) is used to train ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). To adjust the used ANNs architectures and training parameters, a vast study was performed. It includes the effects of variation of hidden neurons, hidden layers, activation functions, learning and momentum coefcients, and also the number of training data sets on the training and simulation results. Some experimental convergence criteria were dened and used to study them. Then a comparison selection rule was used to adjust desirable conditions (Hedayat et al., 2009). Table 2 shows nal adjusted properties of introduced ANNs. Final training and simulation results (Hedayat et al., 2009) show that introduced ANNs can be trained and estimate selected core parameters of the research reactors very quickly. It improves effectively optimization process of the core conguration design. 7. Multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms Evolutionary computations have been developed for difcult optimization problems since 1960s. The best-known algorithms in this class include genetic algorithms developed by Holland (Holland, 1975). GA are as powerful and broadly applicable for stochastic searches and optimization techniques (Gen and Cheng, 1999). They are inspired by the evolutionist theory explaining the origin of species (Holland, 1975). In the GA terminology, a solution vector xX is called an individual or a chromosome. Chromosomes are made of discrete units called genes. Each gene controls one or more features of the chromosome. GA operate with a collection of chromosomes, called a population. The genetic algorithm uses three main types of operators at each step to create the next generation from the current population: Selection operators which select the individuals, called parents, to select chromosomes for crossover. Crossover operators which combine two parents to form offspring or children for the next generation.

Mutation operators which apply random changes to individual parents to form offspring. Different selection rules and reproduction operators are developed in GA to solve and optimize engineering and design problems (Gen and Cheng, 1999). The procedure of a generic GA (Holland, 1975) is given as follows: Step 1: set t = 1 and randomly generate N solutions (chromosomes) to form the rst population (P1 ). Step 2: evaluate the tness of solutions in Pt . Step 3: operate crossover to generate new chromosomes called offspring or children for creation new population Pt+1 as follows: Step 3.1: select two solutions x and y from Pt based on the tness values. Step 3.2: using a crossover operator to generate offspring and add them to Pt+1 . Step 3.3: if the population size is satised, terminate the loop and go to the next step, else go to step 3.1. Step 4: operate mutation: mutate each solution xPt+1 with a predened mutation rate. Step 5: if the stopping criterion is satised, terminate the search and return the current population, else set t = t + 1; go to step 2. Being a population-based approach, GA are well-suited to solve multi-objective optimization problems. A generic single-objective GA can be modied to nd a set of multiple non-dominated solutions in a single run. According to performed tests, GA are the most popular heuristic approach to multi-objective design and optimization problems (Jones et al., 2002). The ability of GA to simultaneously search different regions of a solution space makes it possible to nd a diverse set of solutions for difcult problems with non-convex, discontinuous, and multimodal solutions spaces. The operators of GA may exploit structures of good solutions with respect to different objectives to create new non-dominated solutions in unexplored parts of the Pareto fronts. In addition, most multi-objective GA do not require the user to prioritize, scale, or weight objectives (Konak et al., 2006). 8. Representation of the considered optimization strategy In this paper, a non-dominated sorting-based multi-objective genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) method (Deb et al., 2002) is used to solve presented optimization problem. Simulation results (Deb et al., 2002) on difcult test problems show that the NSGA-II (Deb et al., 2002) in most problems, is able to nd much better spread of solutions and better convergence near the true Pareto optimal front compared to the other elitist multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (Zitzler, 1999; Knowles and Corne, 1999) that pay special attention to creating a diverse Pareto optimal front. Also the NSGA-

2792

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

II (Deb et al., 2002) does not need additional adjustments for tness sharing parameters (Horn et al., 1994). A specic GA representation and also GA operators are developed and used to optimize the core conguration design. Safety and operational constraints are considered using penalty functions (Gen and Cheng, 1996). Also each chromosome must introduce an available reactor core conguration. This means that reactor operators can arrange each gained pattern. It is a combinatorial constraint that should be considered too. Then some components of the used optimization algorithm (Deb et al., 2002) must be developed or changed to overcome the combinatorial constraint. 8.1. The non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II) The non-dominated sorting-based genetic algorithm II (NSGAII) is a fast and elitist based multi-objective genetic algorithm (Deb et al., 2002). NSGA-II uses crowding distance approach by using crowded comparison operator () to reach a uniform spread of solutions along the best-known Pareto front. The main advantage of the using crowding distance is that a measure of population density around a solution is computed without requiring a user-dened parameter such as share (niche size) or the kth closest neighbor (Konak et al., 2006). Elitism strategy (Whitley, 1989) is used to preserve some or a part of the best solutions during GA optimizations. NSGA-II (Deb et al., 2002) is a fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm which preserves all previous and new generated population to choose new population. In the other words, a pure elitism (Deb et al., 2002) was introduced by comparing current population with previously found best non-dominated solutions to use for the NSGA-II. Fitness assignment is based on a non-domination ranking method (Deb et al., 2002). A usual binary tournament selection rule (Goldberg et al., 1989) was developed to use for the NSGA-II based on crowding distance method (Deb et al., 2002). Developed tournament selection technique called the crowded comparison operator (Deb et al., 2002). It is used to select parents for offspring creation and also to choose the next generation population from previous population and generated population by reproduction operators. Crowded comparison operator () guides the selection process at the various stages of the algorithm toward a uniformly spread out Pareto optimal front (Deb et al., 2002). It is dened as follows: Step 1: rank the every individual in the population according to the non-dominated fronts (irank ). Step 2: calculate the crowding distance for each of individual in the population (cdi ). Step 3: between two selected solutions in the same nondominated front (rank), the solution with a higher crowding distance is selected. Otherwise, the solution with the lowest rank is selected. The crowding distance (Deb et al., 2002) is used for crowded comparison operator and is dened as follows: Step 1: rank the population and identify non-dominated fronts F1 , F2 ,. . ., FR . For each front j = 1,. . ., R repeat steps 2 and 3. Step 2: for each objective function k, sort the solutions in Fj in the ascending order. Let l = |Fj | and x [i,k] represent the ith solution in the sorted list with respect to the objective function k. Assign: cdk (x[i,k] ) = for i = 1, l cdk (x[i,k] ) = zk (x[i+1,k] ) zk (x[i1,k] )/z max z min , for i = k k 2, . . . , l 1

Step 3: to nd the total crowding distance cd(x) of a solution x, sum the solutions crowding distances with respect to each objective, i.e., cd(x) = k cdk (x). NSGA-II uses a xed population size of N. In generation t, The next population Pt+1 of size N is created from non-dominated fronts F1 , F2 ,. . ., FR are identied in the combined population Rt = Pt UQt of size 2N. Where Pt is all of the previous population (generation t) and Qt is the new offspring population. The next population Pt+1 is lled starting from solutions in F1 , then F2 , and so on as follows. Let k be the index of a non-dominated front Fk that |F1 UF2 U. . .UFk | N and |F1 UF2 U. . .UFk UFk+1 | > N. First, all solutions in fronts F1 , F2 ,. . ., Fk are copied to Pt+1 ; and then to choose exactly N population members, the solutions of the last front (Fk+1 ) are sorted by using the crowded comparison operator in descending order and choose the best solutions needed to ll all population slots. This approach makes sure that all non-dominated solutions (F1 ) are included in the next population if |F1 | < N, and the secondary selection based on crowding distance promotes diversity (Deb et al., 2002). The complete procedure of NSGA-II is given as follows: Step 1: set t = 0 and create a random parent population P0 of size N. Step 2: the population is sorted based on the non-domination; and each solution is assigned a rank. Step 3: the usual binary tournament selection (based on crowded comparison operator), crossover, and mutation operators are used to create an offspring population Q0 of size N. Step 4: P1 = Q0. Step 5: the population (Pt ) is sorted based on the non-domination; and each solution is assigned a rank. Step 6: the usual binary tournament selection (based on crowded comparison operator), crossover, and mutation operators are used to create an offspring population Qt of size N. Step 7: set Rt = Pt UQt . Step 8: using the fast non-dominated sorting algorithm, identify the non-dominated fronts F1 , F2 ,. . ., Fk in Rt . Step 9: calculate crowding distance of the solutions in Fi . Step 10: ll up Pt+1 from Rt as follows: Case 1: if |Pt+1 | + |Fi | N, then set Pt+1 = Pt+1 UFi . Case 2: if |Pt+1 | + |Fi | > N then add the least crowded N |Pt+1 | solutions from Fi to Pt+1 . Step 11: if the stopping criterion is satised then stop algorithm and return Pt+1 ; else t = t + 1 and go to step 5. 8.2. Develop a genetic representation of solutions to the problem To introduce a developmental genetic representation for different type core conguration of research reactors, each chromosome dened by n genes. Each gene of a chromosome can have a particular and non-repeated integer number (i) between the 1 and n. n is the maximum available number of core positions. Each gene represents one of the core positions. In the other words, the reactor assembly type at the ith core position can be identied with the ith gene value. Then all of the used core components can have different specications. A simple decoding procedure is introduced and used. Similar reactor components such as fuel assemblies with same burn up are classied as a same category labeled by same integer numbers. This simple decoding process is compatible to feed data for ANNs estimations (Hedayat et al., 2009), and can be different for each reactor cycle according to reactor utilities. For this case study (Section 4), 30 positions on the core girdplate are chosen for core conguration optimization. Therefore each chromosome can only have 30 genes; and each gene of a chromosome can only have a non-repeated integer number between 1

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

2793

Fig. 4. An example of the used chromosome and decoded form of it.

and 30. Dened case study has 21 standard fuel elements (SFE) classied as the three different fuel batch types, four control fuel elements, and ve exible irradiation box (I.B.) described in Section 4. Fig. 4 shows a sample chromosome (genotype) and decoded form of it (phenotype) for this case study (Section 4). Fig. 5 shows the corresponding core conguration of the sample chromosome. 8.3. Creation of initial population To create initial population, N initial chromosomes randomly created; where N is the population size number. Each chromosome composed of 30 genes. Genetic values (gene values) are randomly created using particular integer numbers (Section 8.2). 8.4. Fitness functions denition According to the reactor core conguration design considerations (Section 3), two main objectives and two problem constraints are suggested for optimization strategy. They are as follows:Two main objectives: Select the best ux trap with the maximum thermal neutron ux densities. Select the core conguration design with the maximum life time. Two safety and operational constraints: Preserve the limit for PPF. Preserve the capability of control rods for the reactor shutdown. Main objectives are considered by two separate tness functions; and safety constraints are satised by two penalty functions

(Gen and Cheng, 1996). The other main design constraint is the capability to arrange each gained core conguration according to the available core components. It is classied as a combinatorial constraint satised using specic genetic representation (Section 8.2) and GA specic operators (Section 8.5). Maximization goal (Section 3) is changed to a standard minimization problem (Section 2) during optimization process by multiplying in a minus. Used tness functions are introduced as follows: F(1) = F(2) = ux ux0 + penalty 1 + penalty 2 ux0 kout kout0 + penalty 1 + penalty 2 kout0 (6) (7)

where F is the tness function, ux and kout are respectively the maximum thermal neutron ux densities of the water channels and effective multiplication factor when all control rod absorbers are completely out of the core. Flux0 and Kout0 can be used to change primary values to the relative changes according to reference or desired values. In this research, they are selected 1 1014 for Flux0 and 1 for Kout0 . A penalty value (penalty 1) is added to each of tness functions if the PPF of an individual is larger than the 1.9 (Mazrou and Hamadouche, 2004). And also a penalty value (penalty 2) is added to each of tness functions when Keff-in , the effective multiplication factor when the control rod absorbers are completely in the core, is larger than 1. The second penalty preserves the shutdown capability. In order to speed up optimization process effectively, four suggested core parameters are estimated by using four trained ANNs (Section 6). 8.5. Genetic operators The four main genetic operators are used for optimization. They are selection, elitism, crossover, and mutation. Developed selection and elitism strategy used in NSGA-II (Deb et al., 2002) are introduced in Section 8.1. They are completely compatible with presented optimization problem. Crossover operator selects genes randomly from a pair of chromosomes (individuals) in the current generation and then combines them to form a child (offspring). A wide variety of usual crossover operators (Gen and Cheng, 1999) is developed for ordinary optimizations. But this is a combinatorial optimization problem; and ordinary operators may produce some illegal chromosomes. Primary studies are performed to select a compatible crossover operator. Three popular crossover operators including single point crossover, two points crossover, and scattered crossover (Gen and Cheng, 1999) are selected. During crossover operations, some gene values may be repeated and some of them may be non-cited in produced offspring. A special repairing method is introduced to change illegal chromosomes to a legal one. In order to introduce a developmental model each gene of a chromosome can have a non-repeated unique integer number within a specied interval (Section 8.2). Different types of reac-

Fig. 5. Corresponding core conguration of the sample chromosome.

2794

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

tor core components such as standard fuel assemblies, control fuel assemblies, and irradiation channels can be located at the core girdplate. They can be different at each specic life time of a research reactor. They can be classied into same categories according to their specication. For example fuel assemblies with the same burn up are labeled with the same integer number. During decoding process for each chromosome, gene values map to the initial labeled category. So to keep the primary nature of the crossover operator during repairing process, repeated values are replaced with the non-cited values which have the smallest absolute distance from it. This method decreases changes during the repairing process according to the nal decoding process. Primary studies show that the two points crossover is more compatible with this optimization problem. It leads to more spread out diversity of populations. Mutation operator applies random changes to individual parents to create an offspring. Mutation adds to the diversity of a population and thereby increases the likelihood that the algorithm will generate individuals with better tness values. Similar to crossover operator, ordinary dened mutation operators (Gen and Cheng, 1999) cannot be used for a combinatorial optimization problem. Introduced mutation procedure select randomly two genes of a selected chromosome for mutation; and then replace them with each other. Primary studies show that this operator is very suitable and compatible with the core conguration optimization. Also it does not need any repairing process. 8.6. Main parameters of the used multi-objective genetic algorithm Two creation operators, crossover and mutation, are used to create an offspring population Qt of size N. Each operator share to make offspring population is specied by crossover fraction (fc ). fc can be a real number in a interval between the 0 and 1. In other words, in each generation a fraction (fc ) of offspring population (Qt ) is created by the crossover operator while remaining offspring population is created by the mutation operator. The NSGA-II (Deb et al., 2002) does not need any adjustments for tness sharing parameters such as niche size parameter (Horn et al., 1994). It is a pure elitism GA that does not use any external archive (Deb et al., 2002). So the population size (N) is the most important GA parameter of the used algorithm. There are two main parameters that can be adjusted according to some practical tests. They are the number of population size (N) and crossover fraction (fc ). 8.7. Dene a convergence criteria A number of the best solutions belonging to the rst rank are selected as the Pareto front solutions. This number is specied by a fraction of total population size (fp ); and it limits the maximum number of Pareto front solutions that are selected from the rst rank solutions using the crowded comparison operator. Appropriate convergence criteria must be dened to terminate the algorithm after a sufcient number of generations. It is dened by a limiting convergence value (vc ) specication for the average change of a spread function values over a specied number of generation numbers (nc ). It means that if the average change of the spread function values over a specied number of generations (nc ) is less than the introduced limiting value (vc ), algorithm will be terminated. In this paper, two different spread functions are introduced according to desired application. The rst spread function used for convergence criteria, named relative crowding spread function, is the change in crowding distance measures (Section 8.1) of individuals with respect to the previous generation. This convergence process based on crowding distance mea-

sures preserves population diversity without requiring additional parameters. 9. Adjusting the primary optimization parameters The two primary parameters, the number of population size (N) and crossover fraction (fc ), must be adjusted to increase algorithm performances. The main optimization goal is obtaining the best possible Pareto front solutions at a reasonable time. The real Pareto front solutions cannot be specied for this problem. So a sufcient number of Pareto fronts must be gained. They must have a uniform spread out diversity over a wide range of tness function values. Maintenance of diversity is preserved by the crowded comparison operator during optimization process (Deb et al., 2002). After convergence approached, a different spread function is introduced for a ne tuning study. It is used to adjust the two optimization parameters (N, fc ). The second spread function named normalized Euclidean distance spread function. The normalized Euclidean distance formulates as follows:
K

DE =
k=1

fk (xi+1 ) fk (xi )
max f min fk k

)2

(8)

where DE is the normalized Euclidean distance between the two max and f min are the maximum and minimum values of solutions; fk k the kth objective function (fk ) respectively. The chosen Pareto front solutions at the nal generation are sorted in an ascending order. Normalized Euclidean distance spread function is equal to the variance, the square of the standard deviation, of the normalized Euclidean distances between the nal Pareto front solutions. SNED = 1 J
J

(Dj D)2
j=1

(9)

where Dj is the jth normalized Euclidean distance between the jth and j + 1th Pareto front solutions. After primarily studies, listed test parameters (9: ae) are suggested to adjust the number of population size and crossover fraction. a. b. c. d. Average values of the nal generation number. Average values of the nal Pareto front number. Average needed time for optimization process. Average values of the minimum of each tness function.

Fig. 6. The average numbers of generations and Pareto front solutions as a function of population size.

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

2795

Fig. 7. The average used times as a function of population size.

Fig. 10. The average used times as a function of crossover fraction.

Fig. 8. The average variances of Euclidean measures as a function of population size.

Fig. 11. The average variances of Euclidean measures as a function of crossover fraction.

e. Average values of the variance of normalized Euclidean distances (Eq. (9)). While GA have random operations, optimization process of each different state is repeated 20 times; and the average values of them are chosen to study GA parameter adjusting. It should be noted that suggested parameters (9: ae) were used to test developed crossover and mutation operators capabilities previously; results of that described in the Section 8.5.

These studies are performed by using MATLAB 2008 on a PC (Pentium IV PC). 9.1. Adjusting the number of population size (N) After primary studies 0.25, 0.8, 104 and 50 values are chosen sequentially for dened convergence parameters (fp , fc, vc , and nc ) in the previous section (Sections 8.6 and 8.7). A wide spread interval (50:1000) with an increasing step number 50 is used to adjust population size number (N) according to

Fig. 9. The average numbers of generations and Pareto front solutions as a function of crossover fraction.

Fig. 12. Average of the crowding distance measures as a function of the generation number.

2796

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

Fig. 13. Crowding spread values as a function of the generation number.

Fig. 14. Final Pareto fronts.

the suggested GA test parameters (9: ae). Each case of them is repeated 20 times; and the average values of them are studied. Studies result that if the population size is grater than 50, it does not have an important effect on the range of tness functions. Figs. 68 show the results of the remaining tests (ac, e). Fig. 6 shows that the number of generations decreases effectively until a population size of 500. Although the maximum number of Pareto front solutions starts to decrease after a population size of 650, with respect to the chosen ratio fraction for the Pareto front solutions (fp ), Pareto front capacity is unlled after a population size of 500. Fig. 8 shows that the variance of the Euclidean distance decreases effectively until a population size of 400. After that, it is approximately constant and oscillates over a small range. According to the comparison discussion, a population size of 500 can be suitable for this GA optimization. Fig. 7 shows that the used time for optimization process based on a population size of 500 is acceptable. Then a population size of 500 is chosen for the nal optimization problem. 9.2. Adjusting the crossover fraction (fc ) After primary studies 0.25, 500, 103 and 10 values are chosen sequentially for described convergence parameters (fp , N, vc and nc ) in the previous section (Sections 8.6 and 8.7). The interval (0:1) with an increasing step number 0.05 is used to adjust crossover fraction (fc ) according to the suggested test parameters (9: ae). Each case of them is repeated 20 times; and the average values of them are studied.

Same as a previous case (Section 9.1) studies result that the crossover fraction does not have an important effect on the range of tness functions. Figs. 911 show the results of the remaining tests (ac, e). They show that the most effective parameter to adjust fc is the variance of Euclidean distance. They punctuate that the population size is selected so sufciently for GA optimization process previously. Also they show that the both of developed creation operators, crossover and mutation, are compatible with this problem type (optimization of reactor core congurations); but also crossover fraction has effect on the Euclidean spread of the nal Pareto fronts. Fig. 11 shows that a value of 0.95 is suitable for the crossover fraction. 10. Final optimization Studies (described in Section 9) show that the suitable values of the number of population size (N), and the crossover fraction (fc ) are respectively 500 and 0.95 for this optimization process. The 0.5, 104 , and 10 values are chosen respectively for dened convergence criteria (fp , vc and nc ) at nal optimization. They are enough for algorithm convergence criteria. Figs. 12 and 13 show the average of the crowding distance measures, and relative crowding spread values as a function of the generation number. Fig. 14 shows the nal Pareto fronts. Figs. 1214 show that optimization converged after 1108 generations; and also a uniform and dense spread out of Pareto fronts over a wide range of tness function values are approached. The

Table 3 Corresponding core parameters of the gained congurations providing two central water channels. Conguration Optimization objectives Keff-out Fig. 15 1 Fig. 15 2 1.01221 1.01459 th-max (n/s cm2 ) 1014 2.48177 2.45920 Optimization constraints Keff-in (<1) 0.92611 0.96121 PPF (<1.9) 1.80 1.82

Table 4 A comparison between reference core and some of Pareto fronts providing higher objective values. Conguration Optimization objectives Keff-out Fig. 1 Fig. 16 1 Fig. 16 2 Fig. 16 3 Fig. 16 4 1.02495 1.04001 1.04156 1.04242 1.04315 th-max (n/s cm2 ) 1014 Reference core (Section 4) 2.3745 Pareto fronts 2.4399 2.4182 2.4091 2.3993 Optimization constraints Keff-in (<1) 0.85612 0.93432 0.93601 0.93336 0.93627 PPF (<1.9) 1.365 1.801 1.791 1.788 1.794

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

2797

Fig. 15. Examples of the gained core congurations providing two central water channels.

average of crowding distance measures between the nal Pareto fronts is 0.0012. The nal optimization process takes about 2 h on a PC (Pentium IV PC). 11. Pareto front revisions ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009), that are used to estimate tness functions (Section 6), decrease effectively required time of optimization process; while it leads to some errors during parameter estimations. Then to select the most desired Pareto front solutions, a complete revision of Pareto fronts values is needed. It must be performed by an accurate core calculation model. All Pareto optimal set

solutions are recalculated by the developed software package (Core Pattern Calculator 1). The most important core parameters including Keff-out , Keff-in , out , in , PPF, th-max are calculated accurately and stored on a local data base table. Also a symbolic scheme of each desired core conguration is available to help for more accurate selection. The maximum allowed number of Pareto optimal solutions is chosen enough large to enhance nal trade-off. Recalculated solutions can be ltered to reduce selection choices or to preserve additional constraints such as maximum excess reactivity. Two main objectives are introduced for core conguration design optimization. They are the maximization of the thermal neutron ux densities in the ux trap and the maximization of the core

Fig. 16. Examples of the gained core congurations providing higher neutron ux densities and pattern life time.

2798

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

conguration life time by increasing the Keff-out . A relative comparison must be performed to select the best solution. It must be performed according to each desired research reactor utility and request (IAEA Technical Report, 2007). For example some gained Pareto optimal congurations provide two central water channels near the center of the core (Fig. 15; Table 3). They can be suitable to locate some special material test facilities (IAEA Technical Report, 2007) or to take larger irradiation volumes. In almost all of the research reactor applications (IAEA Technical Report, 2007) maximization of thermal neutron ux densities is the most important parameter while conguration life time must be sufcient to each application. Table 4 shows some of Pareto fronts that have relative enhancements to the reference core conguration (described in Section 4) with respect to the both main objectives (th-max , Keff-out ). Fig. 16 shows corresponding core congurations. Table 4 shows that the referenced core conguration is dominated by gained solutions according to the problem objectives (th-max , Keff-out ). Also chosen safety and operational constraints are preserved according to the (PPF, Keff-in ) values. Two secondary safety and operational conditions of control fuel assemblies are suggested to help for nal trade-off or take a more ne tuning study. They are as follows: Relative equal worth reactivity of each control rod according to its position. A sufcient distance between the ux trap (irradiation box) and control fuel assemblies. The rst condition is suggested to increase reactor safety; while the second condition is used to decrease thermal neutron loses and transients during radioisotope productions. It must be noted that suggested constraint (Section 3) are guaranteed that the reactor can be shutdown by control rods, and also the length of irradiation capsules can be considered in which control rod variations have not signicant effects on the neutron ux shape over them during radioisotope production periods (IAEA Technical Report, 2007). The two secondary conditions can be preserved by xing control fuel assemblies and irradiation box in a symmetrical form same as the reference core conguration (Section 4). It can be possible if corresponding genes are omitted from each chromosome. But it limits search space (decision space); and may lead to loss of some useful specic core congurations. The suggested conditions can be used directly or relatively in nal selection too. To satisfy secondary conditions each quarter of core can approximately have one control fuel assembly where a minimum distance (composed of a standard fuel assembly) is located between each control fuel assembly and the selected irradiation box. Each appropriate conguration that does not preserve these criteria can be enhanced by using a simple repairing method according to the suggested conditions. It can be possible if some of control fuel assemblies (usually one or two) are replaced by the same standard fuel assemblies to satisfy secondary conditions too; in which same means assembly batches with the nearest fuel burn up. 12. Conclusion Four main core parameters are suggested to optimize core conguration design of research reactors. This is a constrained and combinatorial type of multi-objective optimization problems. Maximization of thermal neutron ux densities at ux trap and maximization of core conguration life time are chosen as two separate objectives. The safety limit for PPFr (radial power peaking factor) and capabilities of control fuel assemblies for reactor

shutdown are introduced by two separate penalty functions as the problem constraints. A fast and effective hybrid articial intelligence algorithm are introduced and used to optimize core conguration of research reactors. It is composed of a fast multi-objective genetic algorithm and trained ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009) to estimate tness functions very quickly. A non-dominated sorting-based multi-objective genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) method (Deb et al., 2002) is developed to solve presented optimization problem. It is a fast and elitist based multiobjective genetic algorithm (Deb et al., 2002). Also it does not need additional adjustments for tness sharing parameters (Horn et al., 1994). Training and validation data sets must be prepared to use for ANNs (Hedayat et al., 2009). Doing this manually takes a long time while some human errors are possible. In this research, A software package (Core Pattern Calculator 1) is developed and used for this purpose. The random state of developed software is used to create data sets which are necessary to train and test ANNs. Main parameters of structural and learning properties of introduced ANNs were adjusted according to some practical tests separately. Total required times, the number of epochs, and the number of necessary data sets to train ANNs are decreased effectively (Hedayat et al., 2009). ANNs training and simulation results (Hedayat et al., 2009) show that introduced ANNs can be trained and estimate suggested core parameters of the research reactor very quickly. It improves optimization process of the core conguration design effectively. A developmental genetic representation and genetic operators including crossover, and mutation are introduced to overcome combinatorial constraints. Values of the main algorithm parameters including population size, and crossover fraction are adjusted according to the suggested test parameters. Final Pareto fronts have a uniform and dense spread over a wide range of tness functions. The estimation by ANNs leads to some errors. Then to select the most desired Pareto front solution, a complete revision of Pareto fronts values is needed. It must be performed by an accurate core calculation model. Pareto optimal set solutions are recalculated by the recalculation state of the developed software package (Core Pattern Calculator 1). The nal results show that the main objectives of the reference core conguration are dominated by Pareto front solutions while suggested safety and operational constraints are kept. Some core congurations with two central water channels are gained in the nal Pareto optimal set. They can be appropriate for some specic material test facilities (IAEA Technical Report, 2007). Although control fuel assemblies can shutdown reactor according to the suggested constraint and also they do not have signicant effects during radioisotope production periods, two secondary conditions are suggested to help for nal trade-off or improve each selected conguration as a ne tuning study. They can be used directly or relatively by a simple repairing method. To have a more effective and realistic control rod study while the primary denitions for the benchmark problem (IAEA Technical Document, 1980) is kept, the (1/V) absorber type is selected as the material absorber for the control rods. But to calculate Keff-in , multiplication factor when control absorber rods are completely in the core, realistically some more real conditions should be considered. Absorber material such as Ag, In, Cd should be used in cell calculations. It is clear that to have a realistic simulation of absorber materials, properties such as nuclear resonances must be modeled carefully because, they can have large effects on the nal ANNs estimations results. On the other hand, they have so large neutron absorption cross sections to consider a desired and operational shutdown margin as a primary safety constraint. Then the limit consideration for the capability of reactor shutdown can be change to

A. Hedayat et al. / Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 (2009) 27862799

2799

a desired shutdown margin using operational absorbers with large neutron absorption cross sections. Also to increase safety margins, some other safety and operational constraints such as the maximum excess reactivity can be considered thorough optimization process or during nal trade-off. To get the highest thermal neutron ux densities, the one xed and central ux trap is replaced by ve exible irradiation boxes. In each of the different core congurations, one of them has the maximum neutron ux densities; and it is chosen as a desired ux trap. This method leads to a wide variety of search space during optimization process, while it also results in larger prediction errors. Because it saves a lot of time, gained ANNs errors can be acceptable for a population-based multi-objective optimization algorithms (like used NSGA-II). To decrease nal prediction error of th-max , a xed ux trap same as the reference BOC ux trap can be chosen while it decreases search space. In order to reduce time and tasks of fuel reloading process symmetrical and xed positions for the control fuel assemblies can be used. Also according to specic and desired utilities of each research reactor one or more water channel elements can be chosen as a xed and specied ux trap (irradiation box) too. These criteria can be satised by omitting each corresponding gene. It means that corresponding xed positions are not explored during optimization. This leads to smaller errors of ANN predictions, lesser core reloading tasks, and more simple trade-offs; but this reduces and limits decision space. References
Censor, Y., 1977. Pareto optimality in multiobjective problems. Appl. Math. Optim. 4, 4159. CITVAP V3.2 user manual, 2006. Neutronic, thermal hydraulic and shielding calculations on personal computers INVAP S.E. Nuclear Engineering Division. Cunha, N.O.D., Polak, E., 1967. Constrained minimization under vector-valued criteria in nite dimensional spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 19, 103124. Deb, K., Partap, A., Agarwal, S., Meyarivan, T., 2002. A Fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6 (2), 182197. Fowler, T.B., Vondy, D.R., Cunninghan, G.W., 1971. Nuclear Reactor Core Analysis Code: CITATION, Rev. 2. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (ORNL2496). Gen, M., Cheng, R., 1996. A survey of penalty techniques in genetic algorithms. In: Proceeding of the IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ. Gen, M., Cheng, R., 1999. Genetic Algorithms & Engineering Optimization. Wiley, New York. Goldberg, D., Korb, B., Deb, K., 1989. Messy genetic algorithms: motivation, analysis, and rst results. Complex Sys. 3, 493530. Hamidouche, T., Bousbia salah, A., Adorni, M., D Auria, F., 2003. Dynamic calculations of the IAEA safety MTR research reactor benchmark problem using RELAP5/3 2 code. Ann. Nucl. Energy 31, 13851402.

Hedayat, A., Davilu, H., Jafari, J., 2007. Loss of coolant accident analyses on Tehran research reactor by RELAP5/MOD3 2 code. Prog. Nucl. Energy 49 (7), 511 528. Hedayat, A., Davilu, H., Abdollahzadeh Barfrosh, A., Sepanloo, K., 2009. Estimation of research reactor core parameters using cascade feed forward articial neural networks. Prog. Nucl. Energy 51 (67), 709718. Holland, J.H., 1975. Adaptation in Natural and Articial Systems. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Horn, J., Nafpliotis, N., Goldberg, D.E., 1994. A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization. In: Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, Orlando, FL, USA. HXS V4.1 user manual, 2006. Neutronic, Thermal hydraulic and shielding calculations on personal computers. INVAP S.E., Nuclear Engineering Division. IAEA Technical Document, 1980. Research reactor core conversion from the use of highly enriched uranium to the use of low enriched uranium fuels. IAEA TECDOC233, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna. IAEA Technical Document, 1992. Research reactor core conversion guidebook. IAEA TECDOC-643, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna. IAEA Technical Report, 2007. Utilization Related Design Features of Research reactors: A Compendium. Series No. 455, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna. Jones, D.F., Mirrazavi, S.K., Tamiz, M., 2002. Multiobjective meta-heuristics: an overview of the current state-of-the-art. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 137 (1), 19. Kim, H.G., Change, S.H., Lee, B.H., 1993. Pressurized water reactor core parameter prediction using an articial neural network. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 133, 70 76. Knowles, J., Corne, D., 1999. The Pareto archived evolution strategy: a new baseline algorithm for multiobjective optimization. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 98105. Konak, A., Coit, D.W., Smith, A.E., 2006. Multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms: a tutorial. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safety 91, 9921007. Mahlers, Y.P., 1997. Core loading pattern optimization for research reactors. Ann. Nucl. Energy 24 (7), 509514. Mazrou, H., Hamadouche, M., 2004. Application of articial neural network for safety core parameters prediction in LWRRS. Prog. Nucl. Energy 44 (3), 263275. Mazrou, H., Hamadouche, M., 2006. Development of a supporting tool for optimal fuel management in research reactors using articial neural networks. Nucl. Eng. Des. 226, 255266. MTR PC V3.0 user manual, 2006. Neutronic, Thermal hydraulic and shielding calculations on personal computers. INVAP S.E., Nuclear Engineering Division. POS WIMS V2.5 user manual, 2006. Neutronic, thermal hydraulic and shielding calculations on personal computers. INVAP S.E., Nuclear Engineering Division. Rumelhart, D.E., Hinton, G.E., Williams, R.J., 1986a. Learning representations by back propagating errors. Nature 323, 533536. Rumelhart, D.E., Hinton, G.E., Williams, R.J., 1986b. Learning internal representations by error propagation. In: Parallel Data Processing, vol. 1. The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 318362 (Chapter 8). Whitley, D., 1989. A different genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of the Rocky Mountain Conference on Articial Intelligence, Denver. Woodruff, W.L., 1984. A kinetic and thermal-hydraulic capability for the analysis of research reactors. Nucl. Technol. 64. Zadeh, L.A., 1963. Optimality and nonscalar-valued performance criteria. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control AC-8, 1. Zitzler, E., 1999. Evolutionary algorithms for multiobjective optimization: Methods and applications. Doctoral dissertation ETH 13398, Swiss. Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, Switzerland. Zitzler, E., Deb, K., Thiele, L., 2000. Comparison of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: empirical results. Evol. Comput. 8 (2), 173195.