MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W206791236

Computation of maps from surface field data

2004· paratext· en· W206791236 on OpenAlexaff
P L Walstrom, Alex J. Dragt

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2004
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSuperconducting Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Peter's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputationField (mathematics)Surface (topology)Computer graphics (images)AlgorithmMathematicsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conclusions of this paper are: (1) The soft-edge fringe field models were developed for Marylie but can be used for many types of map codes since all use a Taylor expansion of the field; (2) Soft-edge models for 3-D fields with sin m{phi} symmetry are now being used for maps (non-official version of Marylie); (3) Novel approach to designing windings that produce a pure sin m{phi} field (4) Method of subtracting out the dominant part of the field using the tanh gradient, represent the difference field with sources; (5) Plan to add soft -edged 2-D dipole to Marylie/ Impact (Ryne et al., LBL), First tanh model, then difference field; and (6) Later: single-ended magnets, general dipole with midplane symmetry.

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 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 score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicSuperconducting Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207