MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052193140 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2014.6901035

Simultaneous recording of CN tower lightning current and channel luminosity

2014· article· en· W2052193140 on OpenAlexaff
S. Kazazi, P. Liatos, Ali Hussein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLightning (connector)TowerFlash (photography)Current (fluid)Upper-atmospheric lightningChannel (broadcasting)Lightning strikePeak currentElectrical engineeringArc flashInstrumentation (computer programming)Lightning detectionComputer scienceMeteorologyEngineeringLightning arresterPhysicsVoltageOpticsThunderstormStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lightning study offers an interesting research for protection against lightning hazards. CN Tower, being struck by lightning dozens of times yearly, represents a great opportunity for studying tall-structure lightning. The paper presents some recent results related to several flashes that struck the tower during the summer of 2013. The focus of this study is to classify lightning flash components and determine their characteristics. The implementation of high-speed current and video recording systems provides the needed details regarding different flash components, such as return strokes, initial continuous current, continuing currents and M-components. The use of the highspeed camera and the lightning current acquisition instrumentation system has been pivotal to the success of this experimentally-based investigation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207