MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1558817594 · doi:10.1109/ccst.2004.1405370

E-field technology update

2005· article· en· W1558817594 on OpenAlexaff
Kristyn Harman, Joshua Weese

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysics and Sensor Technology
Canadian institutionsSenstar (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacitive sensingElectrical engineeringComputer scienceGround planeField-programmable gate arrayElectronic engineeringCapacitanceResistive touchscreenBall grid arrayEngineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsEmbedded systemSoldering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric field (E-field) sensors were introduced by Stellar Incorporated in 1975 and approved for DOE use by Sandia in 1977. Since then there have been numerous product changes and adaptations to utilize this technology to address a wide range of applications. All such products and product variants rely on the basic concept of measuring changes in capacitance between a "field" wire and a "sense" wire due to the motion of an intruder in the electric field of the wires. In all cases the biggest challenge is to differentiate between changes due to intruders and those due to environmental effects. This has lead to a number of insulator designs to try to minimize the effects of rain, snow, fog, salt spray etc. and various transformer-based balancing schemes to minimize the effects of the environment of the ground plane beneath the array of wires. Recently Senstar-Stellar engineers have embarked upon a complete rework of this technology taking advantage of field programmable gate array (FPGA) devices with high speed sigma delta analog to digital converters to extract more information from the array of wires and thereby optimize the detection process. Several features of this next generation of E-field technology described in this paper include: the ability to discern between capacitive and resistive changes, simultaneous independent measurement of the capacitance between each field and sense wire (for 4 and 8 wire arrays), notch filters to remove 50 and 60 Hz power grid noise, digital signal processing (DSP) to minimize the environmental effects on the ground plane and to differentiate between intruders approaching the sensor and those penetrating between the wires. Along with these electronically generated features the next generation product has a new insulator and support hardware design to further reduce the environmental effects and insect issues. The paper concludes with a discussion of how this technology can be utilized to address the post 9/11 threat at high security sites. While all perimeter security sensors have for years been designed to detect and delay intruders more and more emphasis is now being placed on the delay function. The stacked 8-wire barrier produced by this new design can go as high as 18 feet (5.5 meters) which certainly creates a significant intruder delay if the intruder is to penetrate the sensor undetected.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1050.092

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysics and Sensor TechnologyFrench-language works237,207