MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1557195487 · doi:10.1109/ias.1990.152267

Comparison of the effective dipole method for the computation of the torque with the Maxwell's stress tensor method in non-lossy systems

2002· article· en· W1557195487 on OpenAlexaff
R. Paul, K.V.I.S. Kaler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Energy Harvesting Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaxwell stress tensorTorqueElectromagnetic fieldPhysicsDipoleCauchy stress tensorElectromagnetic tensorField (mathematics)Classical mechanicsTensor (intrinsic definition)Moment (physics)Maxwell's equationsComputational physicsMechanicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In all experiments that involve electrorotation the motion of the cells is a direct result of the torque that is exerted upon them by the field. As a consequence of this the theoretical study of the origin of the torque has been of some interest. Two methods of calculating the torque have evolved: (1) an effective dipole moment induced on the cell by the external electromagnetic field is first computed and then the torque exerted on this by the latter is calculated by using standard formulae from classical mechanics; and (2) the force per unit area exerted on the surface of the cell by the electromagnetic field is calculated by using Maxwell's stress tensor. and from this the torque is obtained by taking a vector cross product with the radius vector followed by an integration over the entire surface of the cell. In this study. the torque experienced by an ellipsoidal cell in a rotating frequency-independent electrical field is calculated by using the Maxwell stress tensor approach, and the limits under which this result yields the torque, commonly computed from an effective dipole moment method, are examined. The applied electrical field is taken to be independent of the frequency in order to ensure that complications due to energy dissipation are eliminated and a simple comparison of the two methods is made possible.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Energy Harvesting TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207