MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588908733 · doi:10.1109/ceidp.1989.69542

The effect of polarity and surge repetition rate on electroluminescence in epoxy

2003· article· en· W1588908733 on OpenAlexaff
G.C. Stone, R.G. van Heeswijk

Bibliographic record

VenueConference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomena · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHigh voltage insulation and dielectric phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpoxySurgeRepetition (rhetorical device)Polarity (international relations)ElectroluminescenceSpace chargeVoltageMaterials scienceLight emissionOpticsOptoelectronicsPhysicsComposite materialElectrical engineeringChemistryElectronNuclear physicsMeteorologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experiment conducted to study the light emission from an electrically stressed transparent epoxy prior to the initiation of electrical trees is described. The effects of surge voltages from 0 to 15 kV, positive and negative polarities and repetition rate from 1 to 10000 p.p.s. on the light output were determined. It is shown that light pulses are emitted from transparent epoxy insulation, prior to the occurrence of a visible tree, during the application of 1- mu s-duration surges. The location of the light pulses with respect to the surge pulse shape depends on the surge polarity. That is, charge carriers cause light emission (and presumably move) when the needle is negative with respect to the space charge region in the surrounding epoxy. An observation that the rate of light emission decreases with decreasing time between surges may imply that it takes a finite time for the space charge in the epoxy surrounding the needle tip to decay. Such repetition rate measurements may provide a measure of the detrapping times.< <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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric PhenomenaSame topicHigh voltage insulation and dielectric phenomenaFrench-language works237,207