MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Calculation of Single Conductor Capacitance by Estimating the Electrostatic Field

2012· article· en· W2026203759 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Emergency Physicians
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConductorDisplacement currentCapacitanceElectric fieldElectrical conductorCurrent (fluid)Direct currentDisplacement (psychology)Electrical engineeringDielectricField (mathematics)Skin effectComputationMaterials scienceMechanicsVoltagePhysicsEngineeringComputer scienceMathematicsElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The capacitance between two terminals of a single conductor working with time-dependent signals is defined by the amount of energy stored in the electric field outside the conductor. A simple approach for calculating the capacitance is presented in this paper, which only needs the computation of an electrostatic field. The approach is derived based on two assumptions, (1) the distribution of potentials on the conductor surface is almost the same, created by a time-dependent current and a direct current flowing in the conductor, (2) the distribution of the potential created by a direct current in the conductor can be modeled by an electrostatic field, in which the conductor is replaced by a dielectric with high permittivity. The approach is only suitable for low-frequency situations, where the displacement current and the inductive electric field can be disregarded.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.327 · 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