Given that by definition LENR requires nuclear reactions, one way to distinguish the various approaches being pursued (with vigor) now is the characteristics of those reactions.
We can make this distinction:
Type 1 - reactions happen with unexpected high reaction rates in low energy systems: AND all (or nearly all) reaction products are forced to be low energy. Practically this means the excess nuclear-level quanta of energy must be fractionated over a very large number of particles so that the energy can couple to low energy phonons etc.
Type 2 - reactions happen with unexpected high reaction rates in low energy systems. Although branching ratios may change from those expected, there is no fractionation so that where the reaction requires a high energy particle as product it must exist.
This thread is to discuss - in the light of ICCF24 - what is the status of type 2 LENR? It has never been that popular in the past - every since F&P experiments did not show the expected high energy products from deuterium fusion. It is accepted that, for whatever reason, most LENR experiments are type 1. (A notable exception would be the CR-39 alpha track stuff).
Examples of type 2 would be the google/NASA electron screening stuff, or hybrid fission/fusion systems driven by low energy reactions, or even relatively low power laser catalysed reactions. Much of Holmlid's work would also be type 2 (but maybe not all of it).
Is this LENR?
How does it relate to type 1 LENR?
Are you an LENR skeptic if you are enthusiastic about type 2 LENR but highly skeptical about type 1? Is it OK to support type 1 but think therefore that the alpha track evidence is probably a mistake?
Is the distinction artificial?