MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998249080 · doi:10.1109/mpe.2012.2212617

DC Versus AC: The Second War of Currents Has Already Begun [In My View]

2012· article· en· W1998249080 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power and Energy Magazine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresumptionElectricityElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Power engineeringEngineeringPower flowMains electricityElectric power systemComputer sciencePolitical scienceVoltageLawPhysicsPower factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This spring I published an article in MIT's Technology Review magazine, Edison's Revenge: The Rise of DC Power, predicting that dc might once again flow through the power distribution grids that deliver electricity to power consumers. It is an improbable scenario in the view of many power engineers, so I half expected some blowback. The most colorful response I received, however, was a note from a Canadian engineer who had reason to question the seemingly unimpeachable presumption that dc had long since disappeared from the distribution scene.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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