MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1967053507 · doi:10.1063/1.4852058

Transverse end effect for a high temperature superconductor electrodynamic levitation device

2014· article· en· W1967053507 on OpenAlexaff
Shuo Li, Yu Fan, Xi Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLevitationTransverse planeElectromagnetic coilMagnetic levitationSuperconductivityRADIUSEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMagnetic fieldMechanicsCurrent (fluid)Materials scienceCondensed matter physicsPhysicsHigh-temperature superconductivityComputational physicsMagnetComputer scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, an electrodynamic levitation device with high temperature superconductor windings and nonferromagnetic secondary is proposed. Because of the proposed device's dimensions vary with its radius, current distribution on the secondary reaction plate is not symmetrical. Therefore, traditional approach to apply correction coefficient are not accurate. In this paper, we propose to use an effective three dimensional analysis model for considering the transverse edge effect caused by the primary and the secondary. Further, we show a simple method of measuring the transverse edge effect by using the patterns of currents induced in the secondary reaction plate. With this effective analysis method, the distribution of current, magnetic field, and normal force in the secondary reaction plate is analyzed. The radial length of the device is optimized.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Physics→Same topicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism→French-language works237,207→