MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041197964 · doi:10.1109/mim.2013.6704968

Rotary in-drilling alignment using an autonomous MEMS-based inertial measurement unit for measurement- while-drilling processes

2013· article· en· W2041197964 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

VenueIEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrillingInertial measurement unitMeasurement while drillingWork (physics)Inertial navigation systemWell drillingMicroelectromechanical systemsEngineeringDirectional drillingLimit (mathematics)Inertial frame of referenceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringControl engineeringMarine engineeringSystems engineeringAerospace engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The severe conditions of the drilling environment greatly limit technical options available to the equipment designer. Some desirable options cannot be used simply because they are too large for the restricted diameters available in drilling tools. Drilling would greatly benefit from inertial navigation solutions, but suitable conventional components cannot be used because of their physical size. This article describes work directed to the provision of improved navigation solutions for MWD applications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.163 · 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