From: ISHIKAWA Makoto [mailto:ishikawa.makoto@jaea.go.jp] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 7:26 AM
To: DUPONT Emmeric, NEA/DB
Cc: NEA_SG33_ML
Subject: Re: Plots of SG33 benchmark results

Dear Emmeric,

I am sending the revised SG33 formats of JAEA results in the attached file.

(1) nuclear_data_prior_caseJ4 (120110).txt
    --> Same contents with Jan.10, 2012 version.

(2) nuclear_data_post_caseJ4 (Rev. 121219).txt
    --> The posterior data of MT100 were corrected.

(3) nuclear_data_prior_caseC2 (121219).txt
    --> Newly generated. Cross-section: JENDL-4.0, Covariance: COMMARA-2.0

(4) nuclear_data_post_caseC2 (Rev. 121219).txt
    --> The posterior data of MT100 were corrected.

I thank you again for your help. (I hope I did not make another erorr...)

Sincerely yours.
Makoto

-----------------------------------------------------------
From: ISHIKAWA Makoto [mailto:ishikawa.makoto@jaea.go.jp] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 3:56 AM
To: DUPONT Emmeric, NEA/DB
Cc: NEA_SG33_ML
Subject: Re: Plots of SG33 benchmark results

Dear Dr.Dupont,

I have to apologize you for my caless mistake.

I checked the plots you made on Web, and found the prior- and
posterior-uncertainties of all nuclear data by JAEA are identical.
I looked for the reason and found it as below:

(1) I sent you the adjustment results of SG33 formats for Case J4
and Case C2 on Jan. 10, 2012. In the files, the uncertainty values
of "nuclear_data_post" files were wrong. I forgot to replace the
uncertainties from prior values to the poseterior values in the
post file. (Cross-section values were OK.)

(2) On the other hand, I found the "nuclear_correl_post_CaseJ4" file
was correct. The posterior uncertainy values were in the right place.

(3) I think you used the "nuclear_data_post" files for the plotting
work, not "nuclear_correl_post" files. I attached the corrected
"nuclear_data_post" files for Case J4 and Case C2. Could you kindly
replace the wrong files on Web to the attached ones, and draw the
plots of JAEA again?

I am very sorry for giving you this trouble and extra-work.

Sincerely yours.
M.Ishikawa

-----------------------------------------------------------
From: ISHIKAWA Makoto [mailto:ishikawa.makoto@jaea.go.jp] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 8:02 AM
To: DUPONT Emmeric, NEA/DB
Cc: NEA_SG33_ML
Subject: SG33 Benchmark format by JAEA

Dear Emmeric,

I hope you have a happy new year of 2012.

I am sending the contribution of JAEA to SG33 as the attached benchmark format ZIP file.

(1) The adjustment cases are two:

Case J4:  Use of JENDL-4.0 for all related data: nuclear data and covariances,
          sensitivity coefficients, C/E values and error matrices.

Case C2:  Use of COMMARA-2.0 for nuclear data covariance, the other input data
          are identical with Case J4.  (No addition of missing data in COMMARA-2.0.)

(2) All data including nuclear data and covariances, C/E error matrix were checked and
slightly corrected if needed, therefore, please throw away the all precious data I sent you,
and replace them with the attached data.
However, the  conclusions by the JAEA survey are still valid.

(3) I added the new file we agreed in the last meeting, that is, "nuclear_data_after_adjustment.txt",
the format of which is the same with "nuclear_data.txt".

(4) I also added an extra file, that is, "Contribution to C_E Changes.txt" which contains
- the table of cross-section changes by adjustment,
- their contributions to the C/E improvement of the 20 integral parameters,
- Cross-section-induced- errors before and after adjustment(GMG and GM'G). It is easy to read the file.
You may upload it if you think it is useful for other SG33 members.

(5) I also attached a PDF file which show the comparison of STD and cross-section changes
in the Case J4 and C2. It is your choice to upload it or not.

I really appreciate your hard work for SG33 activities.

Sincerely yours.
Makoto