PHYS 280 :: Physics Illinois :: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Required Essay 3, First Version (RE3v1)

Electronic submission due Wednesday Feb. 25 at 10pm

For RE3v1 you will write an essay using the scenario and guidelines described below. Your RE3v1 will be graded by your writing lab TA, who will use this rubric. 

Like RE2, the primary learning goal of RE3 is to learn the important technical aspects of nuclear weapons, described below, by writing about them.

Scenario

A group of incoming members of Congress would like to revisit the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, more commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, from which the U.S. withdrew in May 2018. These new members of Congress have asked the Congressional Research Service (CRS) to provide a report on the scientific background necessary to understand certain aspects of the deal.

CRS is charged with "providing timely, objective, and authoritative research" and "insightful and comprehensive analysis...Congress relies on CRS to marshal interdisciplinary resources, encourage critical thinking and create innovative frameworks to help legislators form sound policies, reach decisions on a host of difficult issues and address their constituents’ concerns and needs" (About CRS).

As the analyst at the CRS assigned to fulfill this request, you will write a 1.5–2 page report (single-spaced) that

1. begins with a brief summary,
2. provides an introduction that discusses some of the most important nuclear-explosive nuclides,
3. describes the science and reasons about its implications (see below for more detail about required body sections), and
4. concludes with a brief explanation of why restricting the availability of nuclear explosive nuclides is the most effective way to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

The body of the report should include the following sections, which may be presented in any order:

• A section that describes (a) the isotope requirements for making a uranium weapon, (b) the technologies available to produce uranium that meets these requirements, (c) the particular technology that is currently favored, and (d) the simplest way to create a nuclear explosion using weapons-grade uranium (a-d may be presented in any order).
• A section that the describes (a) the usually quoted isotope requirements for making a plutonium weapon, (b) the technologies used to produce plutonium that meets these requirements, and (c) how to create a nuclear explosion using weapons-grade plutonium (a-c may be presented in any order).
• A section that explains (a) why the production method that is optimal for producing weapons-grade plutonium is incompatible with efficient power generation and (b) why it is more difficult to make a bomb using reactor-grade plutonium than using weapons-grade plutonium. Indicate whether it is possible to create a nuclear explosion using reactor-grade plutonium (a-b may be presented in any order).

Guidelines

• Base your essay on the information in the assigned readings "Physics and Technology of Nuclear-Explosive Materials"  and "Reactor-Grade and Weapons-Grade Plutonium in Nuclear Explosives" as well as the current (Spring 2023) class slides on nuclear weapons.
• Professional Genre Considerations
  • You will be graded on the content and clarity of your report as well as your ability to conform to the writing style of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report—see the rubric. Here are two examples of CRS reports: Primer on Nuclear Cooperation and Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons. These reports are much longer than yours will be and are meant to only be examples of format (i.e., section headers) and style.
  • In writing your report, assume that your reader is a college-educated member of Congress who is familiar with the material that has been presented in the lecture-discussions and the material in the readings that have already been assigned. You do not need to define terms that have been defined in previous essays (e.g., RE2) or provide citations for these terms. However, be sure to define all other technical terms. You do not need to place these definitions in quotation marks, but you do need to provide citations for them.
• Format
  • 1.5–2 pages in length, when printed in the format specified in the Phys 280 Style and Format Guide, including the title, headers, and footers. Reminder: A single-spacing requirement was introduced 1-31.
  • A title that briefly describes the content of the report. The title should be centered, bolded, and 16-pt font.
  • After the title, a brief (2-4 sentence) summary of the content of your report. Include a left-aligned, bolded “Summary” heading in 14-pt font to clearly indicate this section.
  • Each section requires a brief section heading that is left-aligned, bolded, and 14-pt font.
  • Key terms should be in bold the first time you use them.
• Citation of Sources
  • Use the sources required under Guidelines (above).
  • Do not give citations for information that is common knowledge. In deciding what is common knowledge, consider what could be known by a typical University of Illinois student (not enrolled in Phys 280). If in doubt, include a citation.
  • Use footnotes for citations. Footnotes should be in Times New Roman, 10-pt font.
  • Refer to the Phys 280 course slides as "23p280 Nuclear Weapons, slide #" (e.g., "23p280 Nuclear Weapons, slide 15"), the "Physics and Technology of Nuclear-Explosive Materials" article as "NEM, page #" (e.g., "NEM, page 221"), and the "Reactor-Grade and Weapons-Grade Plutonium in Nuclear Explosives" article as "DOE Pu Report, page #".
  • Do not include a bibliography or a list of references.
• Tips
  • Follow all of the specifications described in the Phys 280 Style and Format Guide.
  • Refer to the Resources tab for more guidance on revision. 
  • Don't forget to include the writer's memo for RE3v1 (described below).
  • Optional background reading: Jakes, L. (2022, February 17). Iran nuclear deal inches toward revival but faces critics in U.S. NYT.

Required procedure for the use of AI tools in this assignment 

1. Begin your analysis by using your AI tool to generate a response to point 4 of the Scenario section.
2. Prepare your own standalone answers (no AI use) to points 2 and 3 of the scenario section.
3. Use your AI tool to revise and refine your responses to points 2 and 3 of the scenario section.
4. Provide the revised paragraphs to your AI tool, along with one or both CRS examples (for stylistic reference) and any relevant documents from the reference materials. Then, ask the AI tool to generate revised responses to points 1 and 4 of the Scenario section.
5. Prepare the final version of RE3v1.

Please note: The AI prompts and AI outputs are all to be included in the writer's memo.

AI Disclosure Statement

Discloses the use of AI in technical writing. The statement specifies the tool used and briefly describes how the tool was used. It includes a certification that the author takes responsibility for the verification of all facts and content.

Writer's Memo

note: Writer's memos and AI disclosure statements do not count toward an assignment's length requirement.

Professional writers often ask for feedback on their written products from their peers. This feedback is most productive when one requests comments on specific points or sections. 

For the RE3v1 writer's memo, please compose 3-5 questions to which your peer review partner will respond. These questions can be related to content, style, or grammar. For example, you could ask for clarification on some aspect of the science or if your paper has adequately adhered to the CRS report genre.

The writer's memo for RE3v1 will facilitate the peer review component of this assignment (see below). Please see the Phys 280 Style and Format Guide for additional instructions on formatting the writer's memo.

Please also include:

• Both your response and the AI-tool’s to the points 2 and 3 of the scenario section
• The initial and contextualized response of your AI tool to point 4 of the scenario section
• Both your draft and the AI draft
• A complete log of all AI prompts and responses:
  • Brief answers to the following questions: Did the AI-tool make any factual/technical mistakes in its explanations? 
  • A brief analysis of the differences between your own draft revision and the AI draft revision.  You might comment on the overall structure, factual correctness, style, use of vocabulary (e.g. use of professional arms control terms).
  • Which aspects of your own draft do you prefer over the AI draft?

Your submission must include:

1. Your RE3v1
2. Your AI disclosure statement
3. Your writer's memo for RE3v1

**submission must be in one file**

Content Learning Goals:

1. Learn the isotope requirements for uranium and plutonium weapons and the technologies currently available to meet these requirements. 
2. Learn how to create a nuclear explosion with uranium and plutonium weapons.
3. Learn how reactor-grade plutonium compares to weapons-grade plutonium in terms of power generation and potential for nuclear explosion.
4. Understand why restricting the availability of nuclear explosive nuclides is the most effective way to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.
5. Explore the use of AI in summarizing general technical content.

Writing Learning Goals:

1. Learn course concepts by writing about them.
2. Learn and practice conforming to the Phys 280 style and formatting guidelines.
3. Practice assuming a professional role and style (in this case, an analyst for CRS).
4. Practice analyzing and adapting to different writing situations and genres for responding to them.
5. Practice the use of AI-tools for organizing, drafting, and styling writing.
6. Develop a sense of audience and editorial awareness as a writer through peer review.

Required Essay 3, Peer Review of RE3v1

Electronic submission due Sunday Mar. 8 at 10pm

This assignment has a peer review component. You will be asked to review a peer's RE3v1 by (1) addressing the questions contained in their writer's memo (describe above) and (2) making at least two substantive comments on their RE3v1, preferably using the review feature of Microsoft Word. These comments can address an issue with content, style, or grammar; they could also praise an exceptional aspect of the paper. Your partner will be assigned via email after you submit RE3v1, and you will discuss your review with your partner in the TBD Writing Lab. 

In the email assigning your peer review partner, you'll also receive instructions for finding their RE3v1 submission. You will be asked to email your peer review to your partner at the end of your Mar. 6 Writing Lab.

As stated in the RE3v1 rubric, peer review is worth 10% of your RE3v1 grade (the points will be added after the TBD Writing Lab).

Required procedure for the use of AI tools in this assignment 

1. Write your own peer review comments (no AI use).
2. Upload your peer’s paper and your peer review comments to your AI-tool and instruct the AI-tool to analyze the paper and make additional comments.
3. Create a final set of peer review comments based both on your original comments and the AI-tool’s response.

Please note: The AI prompts and AI outputs are all to be included in the writer's memo.

AI Disclosure Statement

Discloses the use of AI in technical writing. The statement specifies the tool used and briefly describes how the tool was used. It includes a certification that the author takes responsibility for the verification of all facts and content.

Writer's Memo

Please include:

• Both your original peer review comments and your AI-tool’s comments
• A complete log of all AI prompts and responses
• A brief answer to the following question:
  • Were the AI-tool’s comments useful or not and why?

Required Essay 3, Second Version (RE3v2)

Electronic submission due Wednesday Mar. 11 at 10pm

For RE3v2 you will revise your RE3v1 essay. This revision should address all of the comments from your TA and peer review partner. Your RE3v2 will be graded by your writing lab TA, who will use this rubric (different from the RE3v1 rubric above). 

Writer's Memo

In addition to your RE3v2 essay please submit a brief statement (5–10 sentences) that describes how you incorporated your TA and peer review partner's feedback and, if appropriate, explains why you did not incorporate any feedback that you chose to ignore. 

Please see the Phys 280 Style and Format Guide for additional instructions on formatting the writer's memo.

Your electronic submission must include:

1. Your RE3v2
2. Your writer's memo for RE3v2

 **submission must be in one file**