A Numerical Proposal of an After Heating Method for Pulse Field Magnetization for HTS Bulk Magnets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulse field magnetization (PFM) for HTS bulk magnets has the advantage of a field cooling method, because it does not require a superconducting magnet. To reach the largest trapped magnetic field in the HTS bulk using the PFM method requires repeated applications of the pulse magnetic fields to the HTS bulk with controlled temperature and amplitude of the pulse magnetic field. We previously reported the influence of HTS bulk properties on the PFM method, and our numerical results corresponded with the experimental results when a single pulse magnetic field was applied. In this study, we applied multi pulse magnetic fields to the HTS bulk using this numerical model. The results show the outer and inner shielding currents in the HTS bulk exist in opposite directions, while the surface magnetic field is reduced by the magnetic field produced by the negative direction current. We suggest a new method to reduce the outer shielding current using a heater. Our numerical results demonstrate the possibility of increasing the peak of the trapped magnetic field in the heating method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".