MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070553603 · doi:10.1109/tdei.2015.004612

Development of indentation techniques in support of cable condition monitoring programs

2015· article· en· W2070553603 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersCanadian Nuclear LaboratoriesElectricité de FranceAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsIndentationMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite materialStructural engineeringForensic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes work performed over the past few years at Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) to further develop indentation techniques in support of cable condition monitoring programs. Sensitivity to cable degradation of the commonly used specific compressive stiffness (or indenter modulus) is assessed based on laboratory testing of unaged, thermally aged, and irradiated cable samples. Another technique, which consists of measuring recovery time during the post-indentation phase, is also assessed for a variety of tested jacket and insulation materials. The document includes a review of the effect of indenter design and testing parameters on indentation results and provides input towards potential revisions of the IEC/IEEE 62582-2 Standard.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.243 · 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