Elimination of Mass-Exchange Errors in the NRC Watt Balance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report on the evaluation, correction, and subsequent elimination of the mass-exchange errors in the National Research Council (NRC) of Canada watt balance. Two effects arising from mass exchanges during the weighing phase initially produced significant systematic errors in the measurements of the Planck constant ( <i xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">h</i> ). These effects were estimated, and corresponding corrections were applied to measurements of <i xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">h</i> made at NRC between August and September of 2011. The effect due to the tilting of the beam required an estimated correction of (0.238 ±0.018)μJ · s/(J ·s), and the effect due to the tilting of the flat, which supports the beam, required an estimated correction of (-0.636 ±0.056)μJ · s/(J ·s). After the initial measurements were completed, we made several modifications to the balance which achieved a reduction of the two errors to negligible levels. A second set of measurements, made with the modified apparatus in May and June of 2012, shows very good agreement with the first measurements.
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.
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 | 0.014 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it