放射性泄漏源参数反演方法综述

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 近些年来,未知来源的放射性泄漏事件引起了广泛关注。针对此类事件,由于核应急响应通常缺少源项输入,难以依赖大气扩散模型进行辐射后果评估,因此基于有限环境监测数据的放射性泄漏源参数反演方法成为研究热点。本文系统介绍了完整的泄漏源参数反演的完整框架,包括监测数据、先验信息、大气扩散模型和反演方法四大要素,并将反演方法分为迭代优化方法和贝叶斯推断方法两大类。本文对这两类方法进行了深入分析和比较,归纳总结了相关研究的最新进展,并在综合评估各类方法性能的基础上提出了未来的研究方向。

关键词: 放射性泄漏源参数反演, 环境监测数据, 大气扩散模型, 迭代优化, 贝叶斯推断

Abstract: In recent years, radioactive leakage incidents from unknown sources have garnered widespread attention. In response to such events, nuclear emergency responses often lack source term inputs, making it difficult to make radiation consequence assessment based on atmospheric dispersion models. As a result, methods for reconstructing radioactive leakage source parameters based on limited environmental monitoring data have become a research focus. This paper systematically introduces a comprehensive framework for radioactive leakage source parameter inversion, including four key elements: monitoring data, prior information, atmospheric dispersion models, and inversion methods. The inversion methods are classified into two major categories: iterative optimization methods and Bayesian inference methods. This study conducts an in-depth analysis and comparison of these two approaches, summarizes the latest research developments, and proposes future research direction based on a comprehensive evaluation of the performance of various methods.

Key words: radioactive leakage source parameter inversion, environmental monitoring data, atmospheric dispersion model, iterative optimization, Bayesian inference

中图分类号:

X830

徐宇涵, 方晟, 董信文, 庄舒涵. 放射性泄漏源参数反演方法综述[J]. 辐射防护, 2024, 44(S1): 1-7.

XU Yuhan, FANG Sheng, DONG Xinwen, ZHUANG Shuhan. A review of radioactive leakage source parameter inversion methods[J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2024, 44(S1): 1-7.

参考文献

[1] De Meutter P, Camps J, Delcloo A, et al. Assessment of the announced North Korean nuclear test using long-range atmospheric transport and dispersion modelling[J]. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7(1): 8762.
[2] Saunier O, Didier D, Mathieu A, et al. Atmospheric modeling and source reconstruction of radioactive Ruthenium from an undeclared major release in 2017[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019, 116(50): 24991-25000.
[3] Wotawa G, DE Geer le, Denier P, et al. Atmospheric transport modelling in support of CTBT verification-Overview and basic concepts[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2003, 37(18): 2529-2537.
[4] PAN Pujing, Ungar R K. Nuclear event zero-time calculation and uncertainty evaluation[J]. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 2012, 106: 65-72.
[5] Ulimoen M, Klein H. Localisation of atmospheric release of radioisotopes using inverse methods and footprints of receptors as sources[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2023, 451: 131156.
[6] 葛宝珠, 陆芊芊, 陈学舜, 等. 放射性核素大气扩散数值模拟研究综述[J]. 环境科学学报, 2021, 41(5): 1599-1609.
[7] American Geophysical Union. Lagrangian modeling of the atmosphere[M]. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
[8] Pisso I, Sollum E, Grythe H, et al. The lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 10.4[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2019, 12(12): 4955-4997.
[9] Draxler R R, Rolph G D. HYSPLIT (HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory) model access via NOAA ARL READY website (http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT. php). NOAA Air Resources Laboratory[J]. Silver Spring, MD, 2010, 25(1).
[10] Peckham S E. WRF/Chem version 3.3 user’s guide[DB/OL].https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/11119.
[11] Binkowski F S, Roselle S J. Models-3 community multiscale air quality(CMAQ)model aerosol component 1.Model description[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2003, 108(D6):4184.
[12] Thykier-Nielsen S, Deme S, Mikkelsen T. Description of the atmospheric dispersion module RIMPUFF: RODOS(WG2)-TN(98)-02[R/OL].(1999-04-29).https://resy5.ites.kit.edu/RODOS/Documents/Public/Handbook/Volume3/4_2_6_RIMPUFF.pdf.
[13] Allwine K J, Dabberdt W F, Simmons L L. Peer review of the CALMET/CALPUFF modeling system: No. 68-D-98-092[R]. Durham: EPA, 1998.
[14] Brandt J, Mikkelsen T, Thykier-Nielsen S, et al. The Danish Rimpuff and Eulerian accidental release model (the DREAM)[J]. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 1996, 21(5/6): 441-444.
[15] Lyons W A, Pielke R A, Cotton W R, et al. Recent applications of the Rams meteorological and the hypact dispersion models[M]. Boston: Springer, 1994: 19-26.
[16] Seibert P, Frank A. Source-receptor matrix calculation with a Lagrangian particle dispersion model in backward mode[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2004, 4(1): 51-63.
[17] Mekhaimr S A, Abdel Wahab M M. Sources of uncertainty in atmospheric dispersion modeling in support of comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty monitoring and verification system[J]. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 2019, 10(5): 1383-1395.
[18] Hutchinson M, Oh H, CHEN Wenhua. A review of source term estimation methods for atmospheric dispersion events using static or mobile sensors[J]. Information Fusion, 2017, 36: 130-148.
[19] Saunier O, Ingremeau J J, Hoffman I, et al. Methodology for the investigation of undeclared atmospheric releases of radionuclides: application to recent radionuclide detections in Northern Europe from 2019 to 2022[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2023, 192: 109907.
[20] Hansen P C, O’Leary D P. The use of the L-curve in the regularization of discrete ill-posed problems[J]. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 1993, 14(6): 1487-1503.
[21] Seibert P. Methods for source determination in the context of the CTBT radionuclide monitoring system[C]//Informal Workshop on Meteorological Modelling in Support of CTBT Verification. Vienna: Department of Meteorology of the Agricultural University of Vienna, 2000: 4-6.
[22] CHAI T, Stein A, Ngan F. Weak-constraint inverse modeling using HYSPLIT-4 Lagrangian dispersion model and Cross-Appalachian Tracer Experiment(CAPTEX)observations-effect of including model uncertainties on source term estimation[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2018, 11(12): 5135-5148.
[23] Tichý O, Šmídl V, Hofman R, et al. Bayesian inverse modeling and source location of an unintended ¹³¹ I release in Europe in the fall of 2011[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2017, 17(20): 12677-12696.
[24] De Meutter P, Camps J, Delcloo A, et al. Source localisation and its uncertainty quantification after the third DPRK nuclear test[J]. Scientific Reports, 2018, 8(1): 10155.
[25] Dumont L B J, Bocquet M, Saunier O, et al. Quantification of uncertainties in the assessment of an atmospheric release source applied to the autumn 2017 ¹⁰⁶ Ru event[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2021, 21(17): 13247-13267.
[26] Dumont Le Brazidec J, Bocquet M, Saunier O, et al. MCMC methods applied to the reconstruction of the autumn 2017 Ruthenium-106 atmospheric contamination source[J]. Atmospheric Environment: X, 2020, 6: 100071.
[27] Pieter De M, Hoffman I, Ungar K. On the model uncertainties in Bayesian source reconstruction using an ensemble of weather predictions,the emission inverse modelling system FREAR v1.0,and the Lagrangian transport and dispersion model Flexpart v9.0.2[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2021, 14(3): 1237-1252.
[28] Lucas D D, Simpson M, Cameron-Smith P, et al. Bayesian inverse modeling of the atmospheric transport and emissions of a controlled tracer release from a nuclear power plant[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2017, 17(22): 13521-13543.